! 


PUBLIC  E 

hi  MARYLAND 


PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 


PUBLICATIONS 

OF  THE 

GENERAL    EDUCATION   BOARD 

61  Broadway,  New  York  City 

sent  on  request. 

The  General  Education  Board:  An  account  of 

its  Activities  1902-1914.     Cloth,  254  pages,  with 
32  full-page  illustrations  and  31  maps. 

Public  Education  in  Maryland,  By  Abraham 
Flexner  and  Frank  P.  Bachman.  196  pages, 
with  25  full-page  illustrations  and  34  cuts. 

OCCASIONAL  PAPERS 

1.  The  Country  School  of  To-morrow,  By  Fred- 
erick T.  Gates.     Paper,  15  pages. 

IN  PRESS 

Report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  General  Educa- 
tion Board,  1914-1915. 

Occasional  Paper  II:  Changes  Needed  in 
American  Secondary  Education,  By  Charles 
W.  Eliot. 


PUBLIC  EDUCATION 
IN  MARYLAND 


A  REPORT  TO  THE 

MARYLAND  EDUCATIONAL 

SURVEY  COMMISSION 


BY 

ABRAHAM  FLEXNER 

AND 

FRANK  P.  BACHMAN 


NEW  YORK 
THE  GENERAL  EDUCATION  BOARD 

6 1  BROADWAY 

I9l6 


PREFACE 

The  Act  of  1914,  Chapter  844,  which  created  our  com- 
mission, contains  the  following  statement  of  the  purposes 
of  the  legislature: 

"It  is  the  desire  of  the  General  Assembly  that  there  be 
made  a  comprehensive  study  of  the  public  school  system 
of  the  State  of  Maryland,  of  the  state-aided  elementary 
and  secondary  schools  and  the  higher  educational  insti- 
tions  of  the  State  of  Maryland,  with  a  view  to  correlating 
and  coordinating  the  different  institutions  wholly  or 
partially  supported  by  state  appropriations." 

The  Act  also  set  forth  in  its  premises: 

"  That  the  Commission  shall  have  the  power  to  .  .  . 
call  to  its  assistance  any  expert  help  that  may  be  avail- 
able either  from  public  or  private  foundations." 

An  appropriation  of  $5,000  was  made  to  carry  out  the 
purposes  of  the  Legislature.  As  this  was  clearly  insuf- 
ficient to  conduct  so  extensive  a  survey  as  that  con- 
templated by  the  Act,  it  became  evident  that  the 
Legislature  intended  that  the  commission  should  secure 
the  services  of  one  of  the  great  foundations  now  conduct- 
ing educational  surveys  throughout  the  states.  After 
careful  consideration  the  commission  requested  the 
General  Education  Board  to  undertake  the  survey.     The 

vii 


viii  PREFACE 

Board  consented  to  do  so,  generously  agreeing  at  the  same 
time  to  supplement  the  legislative  appropriation  to  the 
extent  of  $7,500  or  such  part  thereof  as  might  be  needed. 

The  commission  state^  to  the  representatives  of  the 
General  Education  Board  that  it  was  the  commission's 
opinion  that  the  State  of  Maryland  could  not  afford  at 
the  present  time  to  increase  its  appropriations  for  public 
schools.  The  commission  therefore  asked  the  General 
Education  Board  not  to  draw  a  plan  for  an  ideal  school 
system  in  Maryland  which  would  be  beyond  the  state's 
resources,  but  rather  to  indicate  whether  or  not  the 
State  of  Maryland  was  getting  the  best  results  from  the 
money  now  expended,  and  if  not,  in  what  manner  the 
same  sum  could  be  expended  to  better  advantage. 

It  should  be  a  source  of  gratification  to  the  people  of 
the  state  that  the  representatives  of  the  Board  have  re- 
ported that  the  present  appropriation,  if  properly  sup- 
plemented by  the  counties,  and  wisely  and  correctly 
applied,  should  give  Maryland  an  excellent  public  school 
system. 

The  report  which  is  now  presented  embodies  a  survey 
of  the  elementary  and  secondary  schools  of  the  counties. 
It  does  not  deal  with  the  schools  of  Baltimore  City.  Nor 
does  it  cover  the  higher  educational  institutions  receiving 
state  aid.  It  is  the  purpose  of  the  commission,  if  con- 
tinued in  office  by  the  Legislature,  to  conduct  a  survey 
of  these  institutions.  A  study  of  education  in  this  state 
would  not  be  complete  without  such  a  survey.  The 
Act  of  1914  wisely  contemplated  "correlating  and  co- 


PREFACE  ix 

ordinating  the  different  institutions  wholly  or  partially 
supported  by  state  appropriations." 

The  evident  object  is  to  provide  a  plan  whereunder  a 
student  will  be  able  to  pass  from  the  lowest  grade  of  pub- 
lic school,  to  and  through  the  highest  that  state-aided 
institutions  offer,  with  the  least  possible  delay  and  at  the 
least  possible  cost  to  the  state.  The  object  has  our  en- 
tire approval. 

The  State  of  Maryland  expends  $269,000  per  annum 
for  the  aid  of  higher  educational  institutions,  besides 
making  large  additional  appropriations  for  the  erection 
of  new  buildings.  The  people  of  the  state  are  entitled  to 
know  whether  this  money  is  wisely  and  efficiently  ex- 
pended and  if  the  state  is  receiving  an  adequate  return. 

As  the  original  agreement  between  the  commission 
and  the  General  Education  Board  covered  the  survey  of 
the  higher  institutions  as  well  as  the  lower  schools,  the 
new  survey  should  be  conducted  without  further  cost  to 
the  state  except  for  an  appropriation  of  $1,000  for  the 
actual  expenses  of  the  commission,  such  as  printing, 
clerical  work,  travelling  expenses,  etc. 

In  view  of  the  fact  that  a  thorough  survey  of  this  char- 
acter will  furnish  the  only  correct  basis  on  which  a  sound 
judgment  as  to  the  future  can  be  based,  the  commission 
respectfully  suggests  that  it  may  be  detrimental  to  the 
best  interest  of  the  state  to  cripple  any  educational  insti- 
tution that  has  any  possibility  of  being  moulded  into 
such  a  plan  by  failure  to  make  the  usual  appropriation 
for  such  institution  at  the  present  session.     It  also  feels 


x  PREFACE 

in  duty  bound  to  urge  upon  the  Legislature  that  no 
appropriation  for  educational  institutions  of  any  char- 
acter be  increased  until  the  Legislature  has  before  it  for 
guidance  all  of  the  fundamental  facts,  supplemented  by 
studies  of  the  experiences  of  other  states  in  the  various 
fields  of  education,  and  aided  by  the  unbiased  opinion 
of  experts  based  upon  these  facts  and  studies.  No  mat- 
ter how  pressing  the  present  need  of  any  institution  may 
appear  to  be,  an  increased  appropriation  may  prove  to 
be  not  only  a  waste  of  state  funds,  but  an  actual  impedi- 
ment in  the  formation  of  the  plan  of  coordination  con- 
templated by  the  Act  of  19 14. 

The  present  report  of  the  General  Education  Board 
nas  the  unqualified  endorsement  of  the  commission.  It 
is  the  work  of  Mr.  Abraham  Flexner  and  Dr.  Frank  P. 
Bachman,  assisted  in  special  lines  by  Mr.  Jackson  Davis 
and  Mr.  W.  W.  Theisen.  Mr.  Flexner,  now  one  of  the 
secretaries  of  the  General  Education  Board,  was  formerly 
connected  with  the  Carnegie  Foundation  for  the  Ad- 
vancement of  Teaching;  he  is  the  author  of  The  American 
College,  Medical  Education  in  the  United  States  and 
Canada,  Medical  Education  in  Europe,  and  numerous 
papers  dealing  with  educational  subjects.  Dr.  Bachman 
has  served  as  Assistant  Superintendent  of  the  schools  of 
Cleveland,  and  was  a  member  of  the  staff  of  experts,  who, 
headed  by  Professor  Hanus,  conducted  the  survey  of  the 
schools  of  New  York  City.  He  has  also  taken  an  im- 
portant part  in  similar  investigations  elsewhere.  He 
has  published  books  entitled,  "  Problems  in  Elementary 


PREFACE  xi 

School  Administration"  and  "Principles  of  Elementary 
Education";  his  contributions  to  the  New  York  school 
survey  deal  with  the  elementary  schools  and  the  school 
budget.  Mr.  Davis,  formerly  State  Supervisor  of  Negro 
Rural  Schools  of  Virginia,  is  now  the  Field  Agent  of  the 
General  Education  Board  in  charge  of  its  work  in  Negro 
Education.  Mr.  Theisen  is  an  experienced  teacher,  now 
working  in  the  field  of  educational  statistics.  Dr.  Bach- 
man  was  in  local  charge  of  the  Maryland  Survey  and 
himself  visited  every  county  in  the  state. 

In  the  course  of  the  survey  Dr.  Bachman  visited  over 
1 6  per  cent,  of  the  white  teachers  and  10  per  cent,  of 
the  colored  teachers  of  the  state.  Schools  were  visited 
at  random,  and  for  this  reason  those  visited  were  prob- 
ably typical  of  existing  conditions.  Dr.  Bachman  had 
the  full  cooperation  of  the  State  Board  of  Education,  of 
the  State  Superintendent  of  Education,  and  of  the  school 
authorities  throughout  the  state. 

The  Federal  Census  of  1910  ranks  Maryland  among 
the  states  of  the  Union  as  twenty-third  in  point  of 
illiteracy.  If  full  allowance  is  made  for  the  20  per  cent. 
Negro  population  of  the  state,  the  results  are  still  very 
discouraging. 

It  is  a  source  of  congratulation  that  the  remedy  is 
demonstrably  clear  and  comparatively  simple.  The 
needed  corrections  in  the  school  machinery  are  pointed 
out  in  the  report.  These  can  be  promptly  made.  The 
necessary  legislation  to  this  end  is  embraced  in  proposed 
bills  which  will  be  presented  to  the  Legislature. 


xii  PREFACE 

But  no  legislation  will  produce  results  unless  our  schools 
are  divorced  from  politics.  Public  opinion  in  the  United 
States  has  long  since  endorsed  the  view  that  education 
and  politics  will  not  mix.  The  welfare  of  over  two 
hundred  thousand  school  children  in  the  counties  of 
Maryland  is  at  stake,  as  well  as  the  happiness  and  pros- 
perity of  generations  to  come.  Proper  education  is 
fundamental  to  good  citizenship,  to  the  progress  of  com- 
munities, and  to  the  state  as  a  whole.  The  problem  of 
educating  our  children  strikes  deep  into  the  very  roots  of 
state  welfare  and  penetrates  into  nearly  every  home. 

Good  schools  cannot  be  made  or  sustained  upon  any 
other  basis  than  intelligence  and  common  sense.  Polit- 
ical conditions  and  questions  vary  in  the  counties;  the 
needs  of  the  schools  are  almost  identical.  They  should 
have  no  relation  whatsoever  to  the  political  problems  of 
a  county. 

We  venture  to  say  that  this  is  the  view  of  all  right- 
thinking  politicians.  We  do  not  believe  that  it  is  their 
aim  or  desire  to  mix  politics  with  education.  It  so  hap- 
pens, however,  that  our  school  laws  recognize  the  ex- 
istence of  political  parties  and  have  been  framed  to 
invite  political  activity. 

The  opportunity  has  come  to  remodel  our  public 
school  laws.  We  have  the  facts  before  us  together 
with  the  best  expert  advice.  If  this  advice  is  followed, 
the  State  of  Maryland  should  very  soon  be  able  to  wipe 
out  the  blot  of  illiteracy  and  greatly  to  improve  the  type 
of  education  provided  for  the  children  of  the  state. 


PREFACE  xiii 

In  other  states  the  problem  of  reorganizing  an  educa- 
tional system  is  very  complex  and  very  difficult.  It  is 
comparatively  simple  in  our  state.  The  commission 
respectfully  submits  herewith  to  the  Legislature  copies 
of  proposed  bills  drafted  in  line  with  its  recommendations. 
We  most  earnestly  urge  their  passage  by  the  Legislature 
of  1916. 

Respectfully  submitted  to  His  Excellency  Governor 
Phillips  Lee  Goldsborough,  December  20,  191 5. 

(Signed)  B.  Howell  Griswold,  Jr.  (Chairman) 

J.  McPherson  Scott 

Albert  W.  Sisk 


INTRODUCTION 

In  the  following  pages  an  effort  is  made  to  describe  the 
organization  of  public  education  in  Maryland,  to  estimate 
its  efficiency,  and  to  suggest  such  changes  as  appear  at 
once  desirable  and  feasible. 

The  people  of  Maryland  will  find  some  grounds  for 
gratification  as  they  read  this  volume.  Public  education 
in  Maryland  is  on  the  whole  soundly  organized;  at  the 
head  stands  the  State  Board  of  Education,  acting  through 
the  State  Superintendent  upon  the  local  unit,  which  is — 
as  it  should  be — the  county,  not  the  district  or  the  town- 
ship as  is  the  case  in  less  well-organized  states.  American 
experience  stamps  this  type  of  state  educational  organi- 
zation as  the  best  that  can  be  devised,  for  it  allows  at 
one  and  the  same  time  for  local  initiative  and  for  central 
direction,  both  of  which  are  indispensable.  Further,  the 
state  deals  generously  with  its  public  schools  in  the  mat- 
ter of  money.  Some  of  the  counties,  as  we  shall  learn, 
do  less  than  their  duty  in  this  matter,  but  the  state  has 
been  liberal — too  liberal,  indeed,  with  such  counties  as 
have  failed  to  help  themselves.  We  do  not  propose, 
therefore,  any  fundamental  changes  in  the  general  struc- 
ture of  the  public  school  system  of  Maryland  nor  do  we 
suggest  that  the  state  increase  at  all  its  appropriations 
to  the  schools. 

XV 


xvi  INTRODUCTION 

So  far  the  people  of  Maryland  have,  as  we  have  said, 
reason  to  be  satisfied.  But  there  are  other  aspects  which 
will  cause  grave  concern.  A  system  of  public  education, 
in  the  main  soundly  conceived,  yields  on  the  whole  ex- 
tremely unsatisfactory  results.  A  few  counties  possess 
good  and  steadily  improving  schools;  a  good  school  may 
be  found  here  and  there  in  other  counties.  But  the  large 
majority  of  the  schools  are  poor;  teachers  are, for  the  most 
part,  poorly  trained;  instruction  is  ineffective  and  ob- 
solete; children  attend  school  with  disastrous  irregularity; 
school  buildings  are  far  too  often  in  unsatisfactory  condi- 
tion, school  grounds  frequently  neglected  and  untidy. 

How  can  a  fundamentally  sound  system  produce  such 
results? 

There  are,  indeed,  a  good  many  reasons.  The  state 
possesses  a  sound  organization  in  skeleton  or  outline  only. 
Neither  the  State  Department  of  Education  nor  the  office 
of  the  County  Superintendent  is  so  manned  and  equipped 
that  they  are  really  effective  for  the  purposes  for  which 
they  exist.  The  State  Superintendent  is  charged  with 
many  important  duties,  but  he  has  only  a  single  assistant 
to  help  him  in  discharging  them.  The  County  Superin- 
tendency  is  in  even  more  unsatisfactory  condition.  In 
the  first  place,  the  law  does  not  even  require  the  County 
Superintendent  to  be  a  trained  or  experienced  school  man; 
in  the  second  place,  adequate  provision  for  skilled  as- 
sistance exists  in  only  one  or  two  counties.  In  most 
counties,  therefore,  an  untrained  official  without  expert 
aid  certificates  teachers,  arranges  courses  of  study,  super- 


INTRODUCTION  xvii 

vises  instruction,  and  examines  for  promotion  pupils 
who  attend  school  regularly  or  not,  as  they  or  their  parents 
please. 

Finally,  the  state's  large  school  fund  is  not  distributed 
so  as  to  accomplish  the  greatest  possible  good.  For  it 
is  distributed  almost  unconditionally.  The  counties 
get  their  quota  whether  they  do  their  educational  duty 
or  not,  with  the  result  that  the  backward  counties  some- 
times do  much  less  than  they  ought  and  some  well-to-do 
counties  do  much  less  than  they  should.  The  state  fund 
thus  becomes  a  source  of  positive  demoralization.  It 
can  be  converted  into  a  real  help  and  stimulus  only  if 
payment  by  the  state  is  conditioned  upon  the  perform- 
ance of  local  duty. 

In  view  of  these  conditions  it  is  easy  enough  to  under- 
stand why  a  fundamentally  correct  type  of  organization 
produces  unsatisfactory  educational  results  in  Mary- 
land. But,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  state  does  not  even 
fare  as  well  with  its  present  organization  as  it  might: 
why  not? 

A  few  words  suffice  to  explain.  Public  education  in 
Maryland  is  "in  politics."  Politics  are  apt  to  prevent 
the  State  Board  from  acting  with  vigor;  to  determine 
the  composition  of  the  county  boards;  to  affect  the 
choice  of  the  county  superintendents;  even  to  enter 
into  the  selection  of  the  one-room  rural  school  teacher. 
Of  course,  there  are  exceptions.  Some  of  the  county 
boards  are  excellent;  some  schools  are  entirely  free  from 
political  taint.     But,  in  general,  political  and  personal 


xviii  INTRODUCTION 

considerations  impair  the  vigor,  independence,  thorough- 
ness, and  efficiency  of  the  school  system.  The  public 
does  not  begin  to  realize  the  seriousness  of  the  political 
infection  or  the  damage  it  does. 

The  following  chapters  discuss  in  detail  the  situation 
which  has  thus  been  briefly  summarized.  It  is  hoped 
that  legislation  supplementing  and  improving  the  present 
state  system  may  result.  But  even  should  this  be  the 
case,  public  education  will  continue  to  disappoint,  unless 
higher  ideals  result  in  completely  divorcing  education 
from  politics. 


PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 


Public  Education  in  Maryland 

I.     MARYLAND  AND  ITS  SCHOOLS 

BEFORE  undertaking  to  describe  or  to  discuss 
education  in  Maryland  it  is  necessary  to  know  the 
state  itself.  The  very  fact  that  we  nowadays 
begin  with  an  inquiry  of  this  kind  is  significant.  It  means 
that  there  is  no  single  educational  pattern  that  ought  to 
be  applied  to  every  state  or  to  every  county  in  any  state 
regardless  of  local  conditions.  Not  only  the  substance 
but  the  end  of  education  must  be  defined  with  reference 
to  the  needs  and  opportunities  of  the  people  who  are  to 
be  educated. 

Maryland  is  a  border  state,  lying  midway  between 
North  and  South;  in  population  and  occupations  it 
is  therefore  partly  Northern  and  partly  Southern.  It 
differs,  however,  from  all  other  states  of  the  Union  in  the 
extent  of  its  water  area,  for  of  a  total  area  of  12,210 
square  miles,  almost  one-fifth  (2,319  square  miles)  is 
water.  Of  the  estimated  state  population,  1,300,000, 
43  per  cent.,  live  in  the  city  of  Baltimore;  a  dozen  small 
cities  raise  the  urban  population  to  just  about  50  per  cent. 
From  the  standpoint  of  numbers,  therefore,  the  state  is 
half  urban  and  half  rural.     If,  however,  the  city  of  Balti- 

3 


4  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

more  is  ignored,  an  overwhelming  percentage  of  the  rest 
of  the  population  live  in  the  country.  Maryland  is, 
therefore,  with  the  exception  of  its  one  great  city,  a  rural 
state  with  an  unusual  water  development.  Its  rural 
character  is  clearer  from  the  educational  than  from 
any  other  point  of  view;  for  of  388,486  children  of 
legal  school  age  in  the  state,  234,900  live  outside 
Baltimore  City.  For  education  this  is  a  fact  of  prime 
importance. 

The  Federal  Census  of  19 10  shows  that  more  than  five 
hundred  occupations  are  carried  on  in  Maryland.  Of 
these  a  few  are  regional — mining,  for  example,  in  the 
mountain  regions,  fishing  and  oystering  about  the 
Chesapeake.  Baltimore  thrives  on  manufacturing,  trade, 
and  transportation.  Outside  of  Baltimore,  agriculture 
predominates.  Indeed,  one-third  of  all  the  wage-earners 
outside  that  city  and  21  per  cent,  of  those  in  the 
entire  state  are  engaged  in  one  branch  of  farming  or 
another. 

Agriculture  has  prospered  in  Maryland,  though  less  so 
than  in  some  other  parts  of  the  country.  In  the  last 
decade  the  number  of  farms  has  increased  by  something 
over  6  per  cent. ;  the  value  of  farm  property  has  increased 
by  40  per  cent.;  farms  now  average  slightly  over  100 
acres  as  opposed  to  twice  that  size  in  1850.  Simultane- 
ously with  the  decrease  in  the  size  of  the  farms,  the  num- 
ber of  owners  has  increased.  The  tenant  farmer,  so 
apt  to  be  an  unfavorable  symptom,  is  not  prominent  and 
is  disappearing.     The  significance  of  these  facts  for  our 


MARYLAND  AND  ITS  SCHOOLS  5 

inquiry  is  obvious.  As  the  city  of  Baltimore  is  not  in- 
cluded in  this  study,  we  are  called  on  to  deal  with  a  sys- 
tem of  schools  serving  mainly  a  rural  population. 

The  population  of  Maryland  grows  steadily,  but  no 
longer  rapidly.  The  state  ranked  sixth  with  320,000 
inhabitants  in  1790;  it  ranks  twenty-seventh  with  over 
four  times  that  number  to-day.  Its  population  is  un- 
usually stable.  In  1910  about  80  per  cent,  of  those 
living  in  the  state  were  born  there,  while  only  8  per  cent, 
were  foreign  born.  In  the  rural  districts  this  condition 
is  even  more  marked;  there  the  percentages  were  84 
per  cent,  born  and  living  in  the  state;  3.7  per  cent,  foreign 
born.  The  border-line  situation  of  the  state  adds,  how- 
ever, a  complication;  for  approximately  one-fifth  of  the 
population  belongs  to  the  Negro  race.  The  schools  of 
Maryland  serve  then  in  the  main  native  races,  living 
largely  in  the  country,  the  Negro  race  being  numerous 
enough  to  make  a  heavy  demand  on  the  state. 

The  history  of  the  state  need  not  be  reviewed  in  this 
connection;  but  a  single  fact  of  outstanding  importance 
must  be  noted.  In  the  development  of  its  institutions, 
as  in  the  South  generally,  the  county  has  from  the  begin- 
ning played  a  vital  part.  The  Maryland  county  is  not 
an  aggregate  of  smaller  units,  such  as  towns  and  town- 
ships; it  is  the  original  and  fundamental  governing  unit. 
The  state  began  with  counties;  eleven  were  created  be- 
tween 1637  and  1695.  Division  into  election  and  school 
districts  took  place  later  and  simply  for  purposes  of  con- 
venience.    The  priority  of  the  county  is,  as  we  shall  ob- 


6  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

serve,  a  fortunate  circumstance  from  the  educational 
point  of  view. 

As  early  as  167 1  legislative  efforts  to  provide  schools 
or  colleges  "for  the  education  of  youth  in  learning  and 
virtue"  are  recorded.  But  despite  intermittent  agita- 
tion, the  better  part  of  a  century  passed  before  certain 
schools  were  established,  which  were  the  forerunners  of 
the  "academies"  established  during  the  latter  part  of  the 
eighteenth  and  the  early  part  of  the  nineteenth  centuries. 
Of  these  academies  we  shall  learn  more  later.  Suffice 
it  to  say  here  that  they  represented  mainly  the  concern 
of  the  state  for  the  education  of  the  upper  classes.  Not 
until  181 2  was  an  effort  made  to  provide  elementary 
schools  for  the  poor. 

Thereafter,  developments  were  fairly  rapid.  In  1825 
an  ambitious  scheme,  never  put  into  full  operation, 
created  by  legislative  action  a  complete  system  of  public 
instruction,  beginning  with  a  superintendent  at  the  top 
and  ending  with  county  and  district  organization  at  the 
bottom.  The  system  failed;  but  efforts  did  not  cease. 
Forty  years  later  a  new  state  system  was  established  by 
the  constitution  of  1864.  This  system,  distinguished  by 
the  great  power  conferred  on  the  State  Board  and  the 
State  Superintendent,  was  evidently  premature;  for 
three  years  later  a  new  constitution  sounded  its  death 
knell. 

The  State  Board  and  the  State  Superintendent  were 
abolished  in  the  following  year  (1868);  the  county 
and  the  district  thus  became  supreme.     Well-founded 


-f  £ 

H  2 

C  trt 

a— 

5J    £ 

o   r* 

r-    U 

C3    l- 

>--       -T 

^_j     c/j 

i—  ~^r 

H    rt 

o 

X5 

r-  ^ 

c   o 

b   °* 

^2  2 

-C   <u 

§J 

cfi 

c  t« 

rt^ 

r^    m 

.  ,     CU 

a -a 

°^  th 

TS  g>.5 

£ 

& 

C    y.    o 

~x 

OJ      r  o 

.— < 

g   u   u 

~ 

•c^~ 

o 

<u    "'   G 

c^a  ^ 

o 

X   C   . 

cfi 

for  e 
om  o 

ining 

1 

s-,    ci 

u. 

4J  t|_l    >i 

£ 

o 

—  ~*      71 

o 

*X  3 

>-H 

OJ.Sf  c 

<L> 

"^  —  rt 

o 

a 

rH      O      »- 

rt  o  c 

tn 

— <      >-    "*- 

OJ 

^     '     _ 

— 
o 

- — 

£    "    S 

1^ 

In    u    u 

03      -_h 

U    C    - 

>-    C    c 

=  8rt 

K    1) ,« 


C   rt 

— 

boa. 

rf 

^   « 

ci 

ftfcl 

_,'  c 

o 
c 

y   o 

^  i-, 

a  v 

_ 

>,-^ 

s 

ni 

«-*-! 

<l>   o 

,— 1 

■  —   u 

*J 

o - 

J-     71 

r:^ 

uJ 

MARYLAND  AND  ITS  SCHOOLS  7 

discontent  led  gradually  to  the  revival  of  central  state 
educational  agencies;  and  thus  by  1900  the  system  had 
attained  the  form  in  which  this  volume  finds  it. 

Though  the  facts  will  emerge  as  our  study  proceeds,  it 
may  be  worth  while,  by  means  of  a  brief  statistical  state- 
ment, to  show  in  advance  the  extent  and  importance  of 
Maryland's  educational  interests.  In  the  23  counties  of 
Maryland,  and  exclusive  of  Baltimore  city,  there  are  1,935 
white  and  550  colored  schools;  the  children  of  school 
age  (6  to  18)  number  275,503  white  and  63,964  colored; 
200,783  white  children  and  44,475  colored  are  enrolled. 
The  state  employs  upward  of  5,000  white  and  almost 
1,000  colored  teachers.  Its  annual  outlay  is  more  than 
$5,000,000,  one-half  of  which  is  spent  outside  the  city  of 
Baltimore.  We  are  about  to  inquire  how  wisely  this 
large  sum  is  spent  and  whether  or  not  the  people  of 
Maryland  could  spend  it  more  wisely  than  they  do. 


II.     THE  STATE  BOARD  OF  EDUCATION 

PUBLIC  education  in  America  has  developed 
most  satisfactorily  in  those  states  in  which  a 
judicious  combination  of  state  and  local  author- 
ity has  been  effected.  The  reason  is  plain.  The  in- 
fluence of  the  state  makes  for  unity  of  design  and  uni- 
formity of  standard;  local  initiative  ensures  the  interest, 
effort,  pride,  and  sacrifice  of  the  community  to  which  the 
school  belongs.  The  public  school  system  of  Maryland 
is  of  this  prevailing  American  type.  The  state  de- 
termines the  general  outlines,  while  the  details  are 
largely  managed  by  local  authorities.  We  shall  in  this 
chapter  describe  the  organization  and  operation  of  the 
State  Board,  discussing  its  part  in  centralizing  educa- 
tional administration. 

The  State  Board  consists  of  eight  members  of  whom 
the  Governor  and  the  State  Superintendent  are  two. 
The  remaining  six,  of  whom  at  least  two  must  represent 
the  political  party  defeated  at  the  last  preceding  election 
for  Governor,  are  appointed  by  the  Governor,  subject 
to  confirmation  by  the  Senate.  Appointments  run  six 
years,  two  terms  expiring  every  two  years.  Thus  a 
total  change  of  membership  requires  something  more  than 
a  single  gubernatorial  term.     The  political  complexion 

8 


THE  STATE  BOARD  OF  EDUCATION  9 

may,  however,  be  altered,  whenever  a  Governor  is  elected 
whose  politics  differ  from  the  politics  of  his  predecessor. 
The  present  Board,  a  majority  of  whom  are  Republicans, 
consists  of  the  Governor  (a  lawyer),  the  State  Superin- 
tendent (an  educator),  a  retired  publisher,  a  banker,  a 
manufacturer,  a  lawyer,  and  two  college  presidents. 

We  shall,  in  a  moment,  discuss  the  functions,  powers, 
and  duties  of  the  State  Board.  But  it  is  important  to 
call  attention  at  the  outset  to  the  fact  that  the  arrange- 
ment above  described  makes  the  State  Department  of 
Education  part  and  parcel  of  the  elected  state  govern- 
ment and  thus  exposes  it — and,  with  it,  public  education 
in  general — to  the  vicissitudes  of  state  politics.  It  is 
not  a  question  as  to  whether,  at  this  time,  or  indeed  at 
any  time,  the  State  Department  has  been  "in  politics." 
It  is  enough  to  point  out  that  the  statute  regulating  the 
personnel  of  the  Board  looks  in  that  direction.  Gover- 
nors should,  of  course,  be  sufficiently  wise  and  strong 
to  prevent  local  or  national  politics  from  determining  the 
composition  of  the  State  Board  and  thus  influencing  school 
administration;  and  Maryland  may  be  fortunate  enough 
to  escape  the  dangers  to  which  she  is  exposed  by  the 
terms  of  the  statute.  But  it  is  assuredly  safer  to  dimin- 
ish the  danger.  The  law  should  be  drawn  on  the  theory 
that  while  the  people,  through  the  State  Board,  decide 
general  educational  policies,  the  Board  should  be  so  con- 
stituted as  to  avoid  the  ups  and  downs  of  party  contests. 

How  should  a  State  Board  of  Education  be  constituted 
and  what  should  be  its  functions?    There  is  as  yet  no 


io  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

agreement  in  practice  on  either  point.  It  happens  there- 
fore that  in  some  states  the  Board  is  an  ex-officio  body; 
in  others  a  lay  body;  sometimes  it  is  composed  of  both 
laymen  and  educators.  The  duties  laid  upon  the  Board 
also  vary  greatly  from  state  to  state.  In  one  place  its 
functions  are  nominal;  in  another,  detailed  and  responsi- 
ble. As  a  rule,  the  powers  exercised  by  state  boards 
have  grown  by  accretion,  uncontrolled  by  a  clear  concep- 
tion of  what  is  aimed  at. 

Meanwhile,  in  the  light  of  our  experience,  it  may  safely 
be  said  that  the  State  Board  should  be  essentially  a  lay 
body  representing  the  people  in  large  matters  of  educa- 
tional policy  and  keeping  the  viewpoint,  experience,  and 
need  of  the  layman  before  the  school  executive.  Obvi- 
ously a  Board,  made  up  of  laymen  and  meeting  a  few 
times  a  year,  cannot  be  charged  with  the  direct  execution 
of  matters  of  policy  nor  can  it  undertake  to  decide  and 
supervise  in  matters  of  detail.  It  is  rather  to  be  re- 
garded as  a  criticising,  suggesting,  and  reviewing  body, 
that  the  Superintendent  must  consult  and  convince  in 
regard  to  all  decisions  of  moment.  The  Board  cannot 
supersede  the  Superintendent,  but  it  can  make  sure  that 
he  does  his  duty  and  can  enormously  assist  him  with  sug- 
gestion and  counsel. 

The  Maryland  State  Board  does  not  appear  to  be  con- 
stituted according  to  any  clear  principle,  nor  have  all  its 
functions  been  logically  arrived  at.  As  the  Governor  and 
State  Superintendent  are  members,  the  membership  is 
partly  ex-officio;  it  contains,  besides,  both  laymen  and 


THE  STATE  BOARD  OF  EDUCATION    n 

educators.  Its  duties  are  varied,  not  to  say  indiscrimi- 
nate, for  it  is  at  once  a  legislative,  a  judicial,  and  an 
executive  agency.  As  a  legislating  educational  body,  it 
makes  courses  of  study,  determines  the  minimum  re- 
quirements for  the  degrees  conferred  by  the  academic 
institutions  of  the  state,  passes  on  the  qualifications  of 
regular  high  school  teachers,  and  classifies  high  schools 
that  are  to  receive  state  aid.  As  an  executive,  it  is  ex- 
pected to  enforce  the  school  laws,  which  will  be  described 
in  the  course  of  this  report — and,  when  necessary,  to  em- 
ploy legal  proceedings  to  that  end.  On  the  judicial  side, 
it  interprets  school  legislation,  deciding  controversies  and 
disputes,  and  even  possesses,  though  it  has  not  used,  the 
power  to  remove  from  office  an  inefficient  County  Super- 
intendent. Finally,  the  State  Board  also  administers  the 
state  normal  schools,  manages  the  state  teachers'  retire- 
ment fund,  and  grants  professional  certificates  valid 
throughout  the  state  and  for  life  to  teachers  of  experi- 
ence and  established  reputation. 

In  exercising  its  authority  and  carrying  out  its  will, 
the  State  Board  acts  through  its  secretary  and  executive 
officer,  the  Superintendent  of  Public  Education.  Aside 
for  the  moment  from  the  question  as  to  whether  the 
State  Board  should  or  should  not  possess  the  particular 
powers  above  enumerated,  it  is  clear  that  adequate 
execution  of  the  law  depends  primarily  on  the  State 
Superintendent.  As  the  Superintendent  is  not  omni- 
present and  cannot  make  himself  efficiently  felt  through 
circulars,  blanks,  and  documents,  he  cannot  make  the 


12  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

State  Department  effective  unless  he  possesses  an  ade- 
quate organization  and  is  vigorously  supported  both  by 
the  Board  and  by  public  opinion.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
not  one  of  these  three  conditions  is  satisfactorily  ful- 
filled. 

The  State  Superintendent's  staff,  as  we  shall  more 
fully  observe  in  the  next  chapter,  consists  of  himself, 
an  assistant,  and  a  clerk — an  organization  altogether 
inadequate  to  the  duties  laid  upon  it.  Public  opinion 
in  the  state  is  in  the  main  indifferent.  The  State  Board, 
partly  for  this  reason,  partly  because  of  the  way  it  is 
constituted,  frequently  acts  on  the  theory  that  friendly 
and  patient  pressure  may  in  the  long  run  accomplish 
more  than  would  be  achieved  by  vigorous  measures. 
It  follows  inevitably  that  the  State  Board  does  not  en- 
force all  the  laws.  In  some  instances  the  law  is  simply 
ignored;  in  others  it  is  applied  with  considerable  laxity. 
For  example,  the  statute  requires  that  county  superin- 
tendents "shall  devote  their  entire  time  to  public  school 
business."1  The  State  Board  of  Education  is  not  un- 
aware of  the  fact  that  in  the  counties  of  Somerset, 
Calvert,  and  Montgomery  the  county  superintendents 
now  in  office  do  not  "devote  their  entire  time  to  public 
school  business."  Again,  the  law  provides  that  "no 
persons  shall  be  employed  as  teachers  unless  such  per- 
sons shall  hold  a  certificate  of  qualification."2  The 
State  Board  knows  that  this  law  is  disregarded,  as,  for 

1Public  School  Laws  of  Maryland,  Chap.  XI,  Sec.  80. 
2Public  School  Laws  of  Maryland,  Chap  VIII,  Sec.  53. 


THE  STATE  BOARD  OF  EDUCATION    13 

example,  in  the  counties  of  Caroline  and  Dorchester. 
Thus  neither  of  these  important  statutes  is  well  enforced. 

It  must,  however,  in  fairness  be  said  that  inefficiency 
sometimes  results  from  defects  in  the  law  itself.  For 
example,  nothing  is  more  important  than  uniformity  at 
a  high  level  in  the  training  of  teachers.  Unfortunately, 
in  Maryland,  several  agencies,  working  independently 
of  each  other,  participate  in  determining  the  qualifications 
of  teachers.  The  State  Board  grants  teaching  certifi- 
cates valid  for  life,  and  in  so  far  regulates  one  important 
part  of  the  teaching  profession.  At  the  same  time,  the 
State  Superintendent  and  the  county  superintendents 
control  other  parts  of  the  teaching  profession.  Thus, 
in  respect  to  certification — a  matter  of  crucial  importance 
— the  law  prevents  the  execution  of  a  consistent  and 
effective  policy. 

Again,  waste  or  ineffectiveness  results  when  powers 
which  should  be  lodged  in  the  State  Superintendent  are 
delegated  to  the  State  Board.  The  Board  is,  for  ex- 
ample, required  to  interpret  the  laws  and  to  decide 
controversies  arising  under  them.  Such  questions  are 
at  times  presented  to  the  Board  as  part  of  the  regular 
docket;  at  times  special  meetings  are  called  for  their 
consideration,  now  at  Annapolis,  again  at  some  remote 
corner  of  the  state.  Perhaps  one-fourth  of  the  Board's 
time  is  thus  consumed.  If  the  Board  had  not  had  to  sit 
as  a  court  in  such  matters,  there  would  probably  have 
been  no  occasion  to  hold  six  special  meetings  in  191 2,  four 
in  1913,  and  five  in  1915. 


i4         PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

Here  again  the  law  is  responsible  for  inefficiency.  The 
State  Board  should  not  be  required  to  exercise  judicial 
functions.  Its  members  are  widely  scattered;  most  of 
them  lack  legal  training  and  experience;  they  meet  regu- 
larly only  four  times  a  year,  and  even  then  but  for  a  few 
hours.  They  should  not  be  expected  to  deal  with  mat- 
ters of  minute  detail  or  technical  nature.  The  trained 
Superintendent  who  has  their  confidence  should  act  for 
them  and  without  their  intervention  in  deciding  tech- 
nical points.  Such  is  already  the  practice  in  certain 
states — among  others,  Illinois,  Kentucky,  New  York, 
and  Virginia — in  all  of  which  the  interpretation  of  the 
school  law  and  the  handling  of  appeals  from  county  and 
town  authorities  are  given  over  to  the  executive  officer  of 
the  Board. 

To  some  extent  inefficiency  has  also  arisen  because  the 
Board,  given  a  specific  responsibility,  has  misconceived 
the  manner  in  which  that  responsibility  should  be  met. 
The  State  Board  is — as  it  should  be— the  Board  of 
Trustees  of  the  state  normal  schools.  It  has,  indeed, 
no  more  important  duty,  for  from  these  schools,  the 
Baltimore  Normal  School,  the  Frostburg  Normal  School, 
and  the  Normal  and  Industrial  School  at  Bowie,  come 
and  will  continue  to  come  the  major  part  of  the  trained 
teachers  in  the  elementary  schools  of  the  state. 

Now,  what  should  the  board  of  trustees  of  a  normal 
school  do?  In  the  first  place,  the  board  should  select 
the  school  head,  and  in  conference  with  him  determine 
the  general  policy  of  the  institution.     It  should  visit, 


THE  STATE  BOARD  OF  EDUCATION    15 

inspect,  and  control.  But  it  should  not  conduct  the 
school.  If  the  head  of  the  institution  is  competent,  he 
should,  in  cooperation  with  the  faculty  of  the  institution, 
devise  detailed  plans  and  submit  nominations  to  the 
State  Board.  In  respect  to  these  matters,  the  Board 
should  be  a  sort  of  jury,  whom  the  principal  and  his 
associates  must  convince  of  the  propriety  and  wisdom  of 
their  suggestions.  It  is,  of  course,  within  the  duty  of 
the  Board  also  to  make  suggestions  in  the  course  of  their 
discussions.  But  the  initiative  should  lie  with  the  school 
head  and  staff.  The  Board  cannot  possess  the  technical 
knowledge,  training,  and  experience,  nor  has  it  the  time, 
to  "run"  the  school.  Unless  the  head  and  faculty  of  the 
normal  schools  are  capable  of  discharging  their  proper 
functions,  they  are  unequal  to  their  task  and  should  be 
replaced. 

The  State  Board  now  manages  the  normal  schools 
through  committees.  Each  institution  is  in  charge  of  a 
committee  made  up  of  three  members  of  the  State  Board, 
the  chairman  of  the  Committee  being  in  a  sense  its  repre- 
sentative and  active  agent.  These  sub-committees  are 
so  important  that  the  State  Board  is  in  danger  of  exces- 
sive deference  to  them  in  the  appointment  of  principals 
and  teachers  and  in  the  determination  of  details  of  policy. 
To  be  sure,  the  principals  of  the  normal  schools  have  the 
right  to  appear  before  the  Board  on  questions  connected 
with  their  institutions.  But  advantage  is  seldom  taken 
of  this  privilege.  There  is,  moreover,  no  evidence  to 
show  that  principals  have  been  or  have  been  expected  to 


1 6  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

be  properly  active  in  making  known  the  larger  needs  of 
their  schools  or  in  outlining  the  steps  in  advance  to  be 
taken  by  them.  Indeed,  the  more  important  changes  in 
the  course  of  study,  in  entrance  requirements  and  the 
like,  made  within  recent  years,  have  had  their  origin 
with  the  State  Superintendent.  Again,  principals  have 
no  particular  responsibility  in  the  matter  of  finding  and 
recommending  to  the  State  Board  qualified  teachers  to 
fill  vacancies.  Applications  for  positions  may  be  sent  to 
them,  but  quite  as  often  they  are  sent  to  the  State  Board. 
Even  though  such  applications  are  subsequently  referred 
to  the  principal,  it  is  evident  that  there  exists  an  unfortu- 
nate doubt  as  to  just  where  initiative  belongs. 

The  State  Board  should  of  course  continue  to  exercise 
a  strong  and  vigilant  control  over  the  normal  schools,  but 
the  character  of  this  control  needs  to  be  modified.  Di- 
rect responsibility  should  be  imposed  upon  the  principals 
for  working  out  plans  for  the  training  of  teachers  and  for 
the  development  and  improvement  of  their  schools. 
Larger  opportunity  should  be  afforded  them  for  the 
exercise  of  their  powers  in  the  management  of  their  re- 
spective institutions.  Thereupon  the  State  Board  must 
hold  them  to  strict  account  for  results. 

In  respect  to  other  technical  points,  the  policy  of  the 
Board  has  been  generally  sound.  The  Board,  for  ex- 
ample, is  authorized  to  prepare  courses  of  study.  In  the 
elementary  schools  the  statute  specifies  the  subjects, 
but  leaves  the  Board  to  determine  details;  in  the  high 
schools,   normal  schools,   and  colleges,   the  Board  has 


THE  STATE  BOARD  OF  EDUCATION    17 

practically  complete  power.  In  these  matters  the 
Board  depends,  as  it  should  depend,  on  its  executive  offi- 
cer to  lead,  suggest,  and  devise.  The  details  of  the  pre- 
scribed curricula  will  be  taken  up  in  connection  with  the 
different  types  of  school.  Suffice  it  at  this  point  to  say 
that  the  State  Board,  through  its  executive  officer,  has 
given  no  little  attention  of  late  years  to  courses  of  study, 
to  the  end  that  instruction  might  be  better  adapted  to 
economic  and  social  needs.  The  courses  of  study  for  both 
the  elementary  schools  and  the  high  schools  were  re- 
vised in  1 90 1,  in  1907,  and  in  1913.  Important  changes 
were  made  in  the  course  for  the  normal  schools  in  1905 
and  in  1908,  and  a  complete  revision  of  college  courses 
for  teachers  is  now  under  way.  As  we  shall  hereafter 
see,1  it  is,  however,  one  thing  to  recast  a  course  of 
study  and  another  thing  to  recast  the  actual  instruction 
given  in  the  schools.  The  course  of  study,  while  still 
needing  revision,  has  probably  improved  in  recent  years 
rather  faster  than  the  teaching  through  which  it  is  ad- 
ministered. 

The  Board  has,  though  not  without  some  excuse,2 
done  less  well  in  regard  to  its  recording  and  reporting 
methods.  As  far  back  as  1872,  the  legislature  empow- 
ered the  State  Board  "  to  issue  a  uniform  series  of  blanks 
for  the  use  of  teachers  and  of  county  boards,  and  to  re- 
quire all  records  to  be  kept  and  reports  to  be  made  on 
these  forms."     Accordingly,  the  State  Board  through  its 

'Chapter  VIII,  "Instruction." 
2Viz.,  the  lack  of  necessary  assistance. 


1 8  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

executive  officer  has  prescribed  a  system  of  school 
records  covering,  among  other  things,  the  financial 
transactions  of  the  county  boards,  the  daily  records  and 
term  reports  of  the  teachers,  records  and  reports  for  ap- 
proved high  schools,  and  forms  for  the  annual  report  of 
the  county  superintendents — a  degree  of  uniformity 
found  in  few  other  states.  The  value  of  these  uniform 
records  can  scarcely  be  overestimated,  for  modern  school 
administration  rests  not  upon  personal  opinion,  but 
upon  objective  facts,  such  as  these  forms  aim  to  elicit. 
Unfortunately,  the  blanks  now  prescribed  by  the  State 
Board  are  by  no  means  perfect,  either  as  to  form  or  as 
to  the  data  called  for.  It  would  be  a  great  improvement 
to  adopt  the  financial  forms  suggested  by  the  National 
Bureau  of  Education  and  the  educational  blanks  rec- 
ommended by  the  Committee  of  the  National  Education 
Association  on  Uniform  Blanks  and  Reports. 

There  is,  of  course,  no  virtue  in  the  mere  accumulation 
of  statistical  data  in  the  State  Department  of  Education. 
The  endless  filling  out  of  blanks  is  largely  a  waste  of  time 
unless  the  data  accumulated  are  studied,  interpreted,  and 
utilized.  As  the  Board  is  required  by  law  to  issue  an 
annual  Report  and  is  allowed  in  its  discretion  to  issue 
special  pamphlets  from  time  to  time,  opportunity  to 
utilize  the  data  collected  cannot  be  said  to  be  lacking. 

The  Reports  thus  far  issued,  while  comparing  not  un- 
favorably with  reports  issued  by  many  other  states,  do 
not  make  effective  use  of  the  material  available.  A 
school  report  should  not  only  give  an  account  of  what  has 


THE  STATE  BOARD  OF  EDUCATION    19 

happened,  but  should  develop,  expound,  and  recommend 
educational  policy.  It  should  exhibit  vividly  not  only 
achievements,  but  needs,  difficulties,  and  opportunities 
as  well.  A  well-written  report  is  the  most  effective  means 
of  communication  between  the  Board  of  Education  and 
the  people  of  the  state. 

The  Annual  Report  of  the  State  Board,  prepared  by 
the  Superintendent,  is  now  a  volume  of  some  400  pages. 
It  could  be  greatly  reduced,  and  to  that  extent  improved 
as  a  means  of  communication,  by  omitting  such  matter 
as  the  abstract  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Maryland  State 
Teachers'  Association,  which  are,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
separately  published  by  the  Department,  and  the  alpha- 
betical list  of  the  teachers  of  the  state — a  separate  publi- 
cation of  which  would  serve  the  purpose  better.  The 
reports  of  the  county  school  boards  could  be  much 
condensed.  In  place  of  what  is  thus  omitted,  the  Report, 
utilizing  the  data  obtained  on  the  blanks  above  de- 
scribed, should  present  in  narrative  and  graphic  form  the 
essential  facts  bearing  upon  the  preparation  and  salaries 
of  teachers,  the  attendance  and  classification  of  children, 
the  condition  of  schoolhouses,  and  the  financial  support 
of  the  school  system.  Such  information  would  supply 
a  solid  basis  for  deciding  upon  educational  policies  and 
for  determining  administrative  and  supervisory  action. 
Each  report  might  well  carry  some  important  message 
to  the  people.  One  might  " feature"  Compulsory 
School  Attendance,  another,  The  Sanitary  Conditions 
and   Care  of  Schoolhouses,   still   another,  Better  Pre- 


20  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

pared  Teachers.  Obviously  the  executive  officer  of  the 
Board,  with  his  present  force,  cannot  act  on  these  sugges- 
tions. This,  however,  is  simply  another  reason  for  plac- 
ing larger  resources  at  its  command. 

The  State  Board  is  not  unmindful  of  the  value  of  an 
aroused  public  interest  in  education.  Indeed,  not  a  little 
has  been  done  within  the  last  two  years  to  centre  the  at- 
tention of  the  people  upon  their  schools.  Educational 
mass-meetings  and  school  exhibits,  authorized  and  en- 
couraged by  the  State  Board,  were  held  in  1914  in  all 
but  two  counties  of  the  state.  There  was  usually  a 
parade  of  the  school  children  of  the  county,  competitive 
athletic  games,  fancy  drills,  a  display  of  school  work,  and 
a  mass-meeting  at  which  addresses  were  given  by  persons 
of  prominence  upon  the  work  and  needs  of  the  schools. 
As  many  as  eight  to  ten  thousand  attended  these  Educa- 
tional Rallies  in  a  single  county.  Some  of  those  attending 
realized  for  the  first  time  the  number  of  children  there 
are  to  be  educated.  Others  saw  for  the  first  time  an  ex- 
hibit of  what  the  modern  school  does,  and  appreciated  as 
never  before  the  significance  of  public  education  to  the 
youth  of  the  state.  Few,  indeed,  of  all  the  many  thou- 
sands attending  these  great  meetings,  failed  to  pledge 
their  loyal  support  to  the  schools. 

The  State  Board  has  wisely  resolved  to  continue  this 
campaign  for  enlightened  public  sentiment.  The  failure 
year  after  year  of  counties  to  take  advantage  of  the 
liberal  aid  offered  by  the  state  for  particular  kinds  of 
elementary  education;  the  demand  of  certain  counties  to 


THE  STATE  BOARD  OF  EDUCATION    21 

be  exempt  from  the  provisions  of  laws  regulating  the 
length  of  the  school  term,  the  minimum  salary  for  teach- 
ers, compulsory  school  attendance  and  the  like;  the 
meagre  local  support  of  the  schools  in  certain  counties — 
are  all  due  more  to  the  stagnant  condition  of  public 
sentiment  than  to  any  other  single  cause.  It  is  the 
business  of  the  State  Board  not  only  to  carry  on,  but  to 
develop,  popular  education  as  fast  as  public  sentiment 
can  be  created  and  the  necessary  resources  found. 

Summarizing,  we  may  conclude  that  the  Maryland 
statutes  are  sound  in  providing  a  State  Board  of  Educa- 
tion, though  the  body  as  constituted  requires  reconstruc- 
tion. The  staff  of  the  office  should  be  increased  so  that 
the  laws  can  be  more  intelligently  and  uniformly  applied ; 
and  largely  through  its  activities  an  aroused  public  opin- 
ion must  be  developed,  ready  to  follow  when  the  state 
authorities  give  the  word. 


III.    THE  SUPERINTENDENT  OF  PUBLIC 
EDUCATION 

THE  State  Superintendent  of  Public  Education 
in  an  American  commonwealth  is  the  head  of  its 
public  school  system.  As  such,  he  is  the  execu- 
tive officer  of  the  State  Board;  he  represents  the  Board  in 
the  long  intervals  between  its  meetings;  he  is  the  profes- 
sional adviser  of  the  Board  in  session;  his  position  makes 
it  possible  for  him  to  unite  and  to  direct  the  educational 
forces  of  the  state.  Whatever  the  limits  upon  his  legal 
powers  in  this  respect,  a  man  of  tact,  force,  and  resource- 
fulness can  exert  an  influence  that  goes  far  beyond  his 
actual  authority.  As  all  our  states  are,  educationally 
speaking,  still  in  the  relatively  early  stages  of  their  devel- 
opment, the  state  superintendency  offers  a  splendid  field 
for  well-endowed  and  well-trained  educational  statesmen. 
In  Maryland  the  Superintendent  of  Public  Education 
is  appointed  by  the  Governor  in  the  second  year  of  his 
term,  "by  and  with  the  consent  of  the  Senate"  and  holds 
office  for  four  years — as  does  the  Governor  who  appoints 
him.  Professional  qualifications  there  are  none,  the 
vague  word  "competent"  being  the  only  limitation  upon 
the  Governor's  freedom  of  choice.  The  salary  of  the 
Superintendent,  which  may  not  exceed  $3,000  a  year,  is 

22 


O 


z 
o 


(U 


THE  STATE  SUPERINTENDENT  23 

fixed  by  the  State  Board,  which  possesses  also  a  qualified 
veto  on  his  removal.  For  though  the  Governor  may  re- 
move the  State  Superintendent  at  his  pleasure,  the  act, 
to  be  valid,  must  be  sanctioned  by  a  vote  of  two-thirds 
of  the  Board.  In  these  provisions,  as  in  the  provisions 
regulating  appointment  to  the  State  Board,  there  is, 
once  more,  evidence  of  lack  of  clear  thinking.  For  the 
Superintendent,  who  is  the  state's  educational  executive, 
should  be  chosen,  not  by  the  Governor,  but  by  a  board  as 
far  removed  from  political  influences  as  possible,  for  a 
term  either  indefinite  or  long  enough  to  avoid  danger  of 
political  complications. 

Aside  from  his  duties  as  member  of  the  State  Board, 
and  as  the  executive  who  carries  out  the  Board's  orders, 
the  Superintendent  of  Public  Education  exercises  certain 
powers  and  performs  certain  duties  in  his  individual  capac- 
ity. These  duties  are  both  supervisory  and  inspectional 
in  character.  For  example,  he  accepts  or  rejects  in  his 
discretion  normal  school  and  college  diplomas  issued  by 
other  states;  defines  the  qualifications  of  teachers  of 
special  branches  in  high  school  domestic  science,  manual 
training,  etc. ;  rates  teachers  who,  not  being  normal  school 
graduates,  offer  instead  some  supposedly  equivalent 
training  plus  practical  experience;  and  examines  the 
reports  and  expenditures  of  the  county  school  boards. 
The  Superintendent  is,  moreover,  authorized  to  prepare 
and  distribute  pamphlets  to  teachers  giving  information 
as  to  the  best  methods  of  instruction  in  the  various 
studies  pursued  in  the  schools. 


24  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

For  our  present  purpose  it  is  immaterial  whether  the 
Superintendent  is  called  on  to  do  a  particular  thing  in  his 
own  capacity  or  on  the  order  of  the  State  Board.  Our  real 
concern  is  as  to  the  efficiency  with  which  the  work  of  the 
department  has  been  carried  on.  In  passing  judgment 
on  this  point,  an  important  distinction  must  be  made. 
The  " mechanics"  of  the  office  have  been  well  attended 
to,  better  indeed  than  one  could  reasonably  expect  with 
existing  facilities.  Modern  methods  of  handling  business 
have  been  introduced,  correspondence  is  promptly  dis- 
posed of,  records  are  well  kept  and  easily  accessible.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  larger  opportunities  have  not  been 
met  and  under  existing  circumstances  cannot  be  met. 
True  enough,  the  department  has,  over  and  above  the 
explicit  requirements  of  the  statute,  in  recent  years  initi- 
ated certain  progressive  measures  of  great  importance:  it 
has,  for  example,  secured  legislation  providing  for  state 
aid  to  and  supervision  of  high  schools,  for  state  certifica- 
tion of  high  school  teachers,  and  for  a  minimum  profes- 
sional training  in  case  of  elementary  school  teachers. 
These  measures,  however,  represent  only  a  "drive"  in 
one  direction  or  another.  The  department  has  been 
unable  to  follow  them  up  vigorously  and  steadily  or  to 
give  the  requisite  attention  to  other  large  problems  of 
equal  urgency. 

The  reason  is  plain.  Nothing  is  simpler  than  to  author- 
ize or  require  the  State  Superintendent  to  "supervise," 
"inspect,"  "examine,"  or  "pass  upon."  But  neither 
inspection,  supervision,  nor  examination  can  avail,  unless 


THE  STATE  SUPERINTENDENT  25 

an  adequate  trained  organization  is  provided  through 
which  he  can  work.  As  has  been  pointed  out  in  the  pre- 
ceding chapter,  the  force  at  the  Superintendent's  disposal 
is  utterly  insufficient.  He  has  a  single  assistant  appointed 
with  the  approval  of  the  State  Board  at  a  salary  of  $2,000 
and  one  clerk  at  a  salary  not  to  exceed  $1,200.  In 
addition  to  his  own  salary,  he  has  an  expense  allowance 
of  five  hundred  dollars,  and  one  thousand  dollars  more 
for  furniture,  supplies,  and  printing.1  Three  persons  thus 
constitute  the  entire  staff  at  the  disposal  of  the  State  Su- 
perintendent of  Education  in  Maryland.  It  goes  without 
saying  that  the  functions  which  we  have  enumerated  sim- 
ply cannot  be  effectively  discharged  by  this  organization. 
In  lieu  of  an  organized  and  specialized  staff  of  which 
he  would  be  the  directing  and  inspiring  chief,  the  State 
Superintendent  of  Maryland  obtains,  as  best  he  can,  such 
knowledge  of  school  conditions  as  will  enable  him  and  the 
State  Board  to  perform  their  various  duties  as  intelli- 
gently as  may  be.  He  therefore  spends  the  major  por- 
tion of  his  time  in  actually  visiting  schools  in  different 
parts  of  the  state.  Obviously  he  cannot  thoroughly 
cover  the  field.  He  is  thus  compelled  to  assume  that  by 
hastily  "sampling"  the  situation  here  and  there,  he  ob- 
tains a  fairly  adequate  conception  of  existing  conditions. 
Thus  he  glances  at  the  school  grounds,  notes  the  condi- 
tions of  the  buildings,  and  examines  cursorily  the  school 

JThe  State  Board  has  an  appropriation  of  $3,000  to  cover  the  expenses 
of  members  in  attending  meetings,  printing,  supplies,  etc.  The  depart- 
ment therefore  costs  the  state  $10,700  a  year,  all  told. 


26  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

equipment.  His  main  concern,  in  the  brief  period  at  his 
disposal,  is,  however,  the  teaching  in  progress.  On  the 
basis  of  a  hurried  inspection  advice  is  tendered  to  teach- 
ers, principals,  and  school  officials.  In  addition  to  these 
efforts  to  study  and  to  improve  schools  scattered  through- 
out the  state,  the  Superintendent  frequently  participates 
in  teachers'  meetings  and  civic  conferences.  He  main- 
tains, besides,  an  active  and  voluminous  correspondence 
with  principals,  county  superintendents,  and  County 
School  Board  members  throughout  the  state.  Aside 
from  information  thus  acquired,  the  Superintendent  can 
know  only  what  the  county  authorities  report  to  him. 
But  these  reports  are  of  very  uneven  quality;  and  the  state 
department  can  under  existing  conditions  do  little  either 
to  improve  them  or  to  utilize  the  data  which  they  obtain. 
The  high  school  situation  may  be  cited  to  show  the 
folly  of  not  giving  the  State  Superintendent  staff  enough 
to  ensure  the  wise  expenditure  of  the  state's  money  or  the 
effective  execution  of  the  state's  policy.  In  1 910  a 
complete  high  school  reorganization  was  undertaken  on 
the  basis  of  state  aid.  It  was  provided  that,  on  the 
basis  of  reports  made  by  high  school  principals,  and 
inspections  made  by  the  State  Superintendent,  the  high 
schools  should  be  classified  in  two  groups,  those  of  the 
first  group  to  receive  an  annual  maximum  grant  of 
$2,500  each,  those  of  the  second  group  to  receive  an  an- 
nual maximum  grant  of  $1,400  each.1     The  law  provides 

'In  1914  there  were  29  first-class  high  schools,  receiving  from  the  state 
$67,700;  36  second-class  high  schools,  receiving  $50,400. 


THE  STATE  SUPERINTENDENT  27 

that  every  state-aided  high  school  shall  be  inspected 
annually ;  if,  on  notification  of  defects,  the  proper  remedial 
steps  are  not  taken,  the  state  subsidy  is  to  cease. 

The  law  thus  creates  for  the  State  Superintendent  the 
opportunity  to  direct  the  high  school  development  of  the 
state.  He  simply  cannot  take  full  advantage  of  this 
opportunity.  The  letter  of  the  law  has  indeed  been  com- 
plied with:  the  Superintendent  or  his  assistant  has  visited 
the  high  schools  once  a  year.  But  the  visit  has  been 
casual,  concerning  itself  with  ascertaining  whether  the 
formal  requirements  of  the  statute  are  complied  with. 
Again,  the  last  General  Assembly  provided  that  no  per- 
son is  to  serve  "as  principal  or  assistant  teacher  (in  a 
state-aided  high  school)  whose  qualifications  have  not 
been  passed  upon  by  the  State  Board  of  Education." 
To  carry  out  the  provisions  of  this  act,  the  Board  will 
need  to  prescribe  the  minimum  qualifications  for  high 
school  teachers,  including  principals,  and  then  to  examine 
the  qualifications  of  the  300  regular  high  school  teachers 
in  service.  Thus  far  the  State  Board  has  failed  to  move, 
not  because  it  is  difficult  to  prescribe  the  minimum 
qualifications  of  high  school  teachers,  but  rather,  as 
we  might  suppose,  because  its  executive  officer,  upon 
whom  the  duty  falls,  lacks  the  necessary  time  and  assist- 
ance. 

One  more  illustration,  taken  from  a  different  field,  that 
of  school  finance,  may  be  worth  giving.  The  public 
schools  of  Maryland  are  supported  partly  by  local  tax- 
ation, partly  by  apportionment  of  a  state  fund.     The 


2S  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

State  Superintendent  is  expected  to  safeguard  the  interest 
of  both  the  state  and  the  local  taxpayer  by  examining 
the  accounts  of  county  school  boards  and  reporting 
thereon  to  the  State  Board.  It  was  evidently  intended 
that  the  State  Board  should  thus  exercise  a  reasonable 
control  over  the  finances  of  the  county  boards,  in  refer- 
ence to  acts  omitted  as  well  as  acts  committed.  At  any 
rate,  such  should  be  the  policy  of  the  state.  Though  the 
bookkeeping  of  the  county  boards  is  fixed  except  in 
minor  details  by  the  forms  prescribed  by  the  State  Board 
of  Education,  the  forms  in  use  are  quite  defective.  It  is, 
for  example,  difficult  to  determine  from  them  the  exact 
financial  status  of  a  County  Board,  no  separate  accounts 
being  kept  with  funded  debt,  current  loans,  ordinary 
receipts,  and  the  like.  It  is  even  more  difficult  to  de- 
termine the  expenditure  for  separate  items  such,  for 
instance,  as  new  buildings,  repairs,  upkeep,  and  main- 
tenance; and  it  is  quite  impossible  to  tell  what  the  ele- 
mentary schools  and  the  high  schools  are  each  costing. 
The  use  of  antiquated  forms  is  undoubtedly  to  be 
attributed  to  the  lack  of  a  skilled  accountant  in  the 
Superintendent's  office.  And  the  same  lack  accounts  for 
the  fact  that,  having  received  these  reports,  the  State 
Superintendent  can  simply  check  them  up  and  file  them 
away. 

The  moral  of  the  foregoing  discussion  is  obvious.  The 
Superintendent  of  Public  Education  in  Maryland 
cannot  be  the  state's  educational  leader  unless  he  has 
proper  assistance  and  support.     The  office  can  no  longer 


THE  STATE  SUPERINTENDENT  29 

be  conducted  with  its  present  force  or  on  its  present 
allowance.  In  ways  that  will  appear  as  we  proceed,  the 
State  Superintendent  must  be  assisted  by  adding  to  his 
resources  a  few  experts  capable  of  taking  the  field  under 
his  direction  in  charge  of  specialized  activities. 


IV.    THE  COUNTY  SCHOOL  AUTHORITIES 

CENTRAL  control  of  public  education  is  thus,  as 
we  have  now  seen,  in  the  hands  of  the  State  Board 
and  the  Superintendent  of  Public  Education. 
Local  control  is,  in  the  main,  exercised  by  a  board  of 
county  school  commissioners.  The  present  chapter  will 
discuss  the  functions  of  the  local  authorities  and  their  re- 
lations with  the  state  department. 

Three  forms  of  local  educational  administration  are  in 
use  in  this  country:  the  district  system,  the  township 
system,  and  the  county  unit.  Of  these  the  district  and 
the  county  represent  the  two  extremes.  A  word  as  to 
the  district  system  may  assist  us  to  appreciate  the  im- 
portance of  the  form  of  organization  that  Maryland 
possesses. 

Under  the  district  system  every  school,  as  a  rule,  has 
an  independent  board  of  trustees,  which  "runs"  the 
school,  levying  and  collecting  taxes,  erecting  the  school- 
house,  determining  the  length  of  the  term,  prescribing 
the  curriculum,  selecting  text-books,  and  employing  the 
teacher.  The  mere  description  at  once  suggests  the 
defects  of  the  scheme.  In  the  first  place,  no  state  and 
no  county  contains  as  many  persons  qualified  to  manage 
schools   intelligently   as    the   district   system   requires. 

30 


o 


u 

4-> 

c 

Wi     >-. 

_*    *-• 


■-     >-    Z 


a.      ^3 

O     tn   r£ 

-a  « 


-S  c 


o 
o 


55 


THE  COUNTY  SCHOOL  AUTHORITIES         31 

Again,  the  district  system  accepts  all  sorts  of  inequalities 
in  educational  facilities  and  efforts.  One  district  may 
possess  a  good  school  with  ample  grounds  and  comfort- 
able buildings,  while  in  another,  close  by,  the  school  is 
wretchedly  poor.  No  agency  exists  which  can  diminish 
these  divergencies  by  working  toward  a  general  plan. 
Finally,  teachers  need  teamwork  and  supervision  if  they 
are  to  keep  in  touch  with  professional  progress.  But 
teamwork  and  supervision  presuppose  a  larger  area  than 
the  district.  The  truth  is  that  the  district  school  re- 
flects pioneer  conditions.  It  goes  back  to  the  time  when 
an  isolated  group,  desiring  some  sort  of  education  for  its 
children,  pooled  its  meagre  resources  in  order  to  establish 
a  neighborhood  school.  Increased  wealth,  larger  num- 
bers, improved  communications,  and  more  complicated 
educational  requirements  render  the  district  system  and 
the  district  school  obsolete. 

As  the  county  organization  offers  a  wider  service,  it 
tends  to  attract  able  men  into  the  County  Board;  and  as 
this  body  can  dispose  in  its  discretion  of  the  total  yield 
of  the  county  school  taxes  plus  the  state  apportionment, 
something  like  statesmanship  may  be  employed  in 
locating,  equipping,  and  consolidating  schools.  Educa- 
tional opportunities  can  thus  more  or  less  be  equalized. 
The  situation  may,  in  a  word,  be  viewed  as  a  whole, 
the  county  schools  forming  a  system  in  the  development 
of  which  intelligence  and  design  may  be  employed — 
provided,  of  course,  the  people  are  wise  enough  to  take 
advantage  of  their  opportunities. 


32  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

Maryland  is  fortunate  in  possessing  the  county  as  the 
educational  unit.  Nevertheless,  it  has  by  no  means 
realized  to  the  full  the  advantages  of  the  county  type 
of  organization,  partly,  as  we  shall  see,  because  political 
and  personal  considerations  are  too  apt  to  influence  the 
selection  and  the  policy  of  commissioners,  partly  because 
in  the  selection  of  teachers  a  vestige  of  the  district  sys- 
tem confuses  and  weakens  administration. 

The  county  boards  of  education  in  Maryland  are 
appointed  by  the  Governor  and  are  composed  of  six  mem- 
bers each  in  six  counties,1  and  of  three  in  the  remaining 
counties.  Continuity  of  service  is  secured  through  a 
six-year  term,  and  through  so  ordering  the  appointments 
that  there  are  at  the  end  of  each  second  year  not  to  ex- 
ceed two  vacancies  in  the  large  counties  and  not  more 
than  one  in  the  small  counties.  The  County  Board  ap- 
points three  district  trustees  for  each  schoolhouse  dis- 
trict. These  district  trustees  are  the  custodians  of  the 
school  property  and  have  the  power  to  select  the  principal 
teacher,  subject  to  the  approval  of  the  County  Board. 
All  subordinate  teachers  and  all  high  school  teachers  are 
appointed  by  the  County  Board.  The  district  trustees 
may  also  remove  any  teacher  they  themselves  appoint, 
though  the  teacher  retains  the  right  of  appeal  to  the 
County  Board.  To  these  powers  of  the  district  trustees 
we  shall  have  occasion  later  to  recur. 

The  method  of  appointing  the  members  of  the  County 

^These  counties  are  Baltimore,  Carroll,  Frederick,  Dorchester,  Wash- 
ington, and  Montgomery. 


THE  COUNTY  SCHOOL  AUTHORITIES         33 

Board  is  open  to  question.  Undoubtedly,  appointment 
by  the  Governor  might  draw  into  service  men  of  character 
and  standing  who  would  not  be  willing  to  wage  an  elec- 
toral campaign  for  the  post.  The  system,  however,  does 
not  always  work  in  that  way.  The  law  provides  that  at 
least  two  of  the  members  in  large  counties  and  at  least 
one  in  small  counties  must  be  of  the  political  party 
defeated  in  the  last  election,  and  that  these  appoint- 
ments must  be  made  "by  and  with  the  advice  and 
consent  of  the  Senate."  These  limitations  make  the 
partisan  consideration  needlessly  prominent;  in  conse- 
quence, appointments  are  viewed  by  local  politicians 
and  local  political  organizations  as  "spoils,"  so  that  the 
County  Board  of  Education  is  almost  everywhere  looked 
upon  as  a  "Democratic"  board  or  as  a  "Republican" 
board,  with  party  allegiance  and  party  interests  to  con- 
sider. Again,  the  "advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate" 
have  come  to  mean,  not  the  approval  of  the  entire  Senate, 
but  the  approval  of  the  local  senator.  Indeed,  to  such  a 
pass  has  senatorial  courtesy  come,  that  the  Senate  flatly 
refuses  to  confirm  an  appointment  not  endorsed  by  the 
local  senator.  And  the  local  senator  is  tempted  to  act 
not  as  the  representative  of  the  people,  but  rather  as  the 
spokesman  of  the  county  political  organization.  The 
office  of  county  school  commissioner  is  thus  usually  re- 
garded as  a  political  office,  the  public  being  for  the  most 
part  indifferent  to  the  dangers  involved  in  this  concep- 
tion. The  county  boards  are  therefore  in  the  main 
seriously  infected  with  politics. 


34         PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

In  order  to  discharge  its  functions  the  County  Board 
must  be  in  position  to  procure  adequate  school  funds,  to 
select  the  County  Superintendent,  and,  through  him  and 
his  assistants,  to  provide  suitable  facilities  and  com- 
petent teachers,  whose  work  is  from  time  to  time  in- 
spected and  supervised.  Let  us  now  see  how  the  county 
boards  do  their  work. 

Money  is  the  first  requisite — money  for  buildings,  for 
up-keep,  for  equipment,  for  teachers  and  supervision, 
but  county  school  boards  are  not  "authorized,  empow- 
ered, directed,  and  required  to  levy  and  collect"  such 
taxes  as  will  be  adequate  to  maintain  an  efficient  school 
system  throughout  the  county.  The  tax-levying  body 
of  the  county  is  the  county  board  of  commissioners,  who 
are  required  under  the  law  to  levy  such  sums  of  money 
as  the  County  School  Board  requests  for  the  schools, 
provided  such  sums  shall  not  exceed  15  cents  on  each 
$100  of  the  taxable  property  of  the  county;  whether  or 
not  the  county  commissioners  shall  levy  any  amount  in 
excess  of  15  cents  is  left  entirely  to  their  discretion. 
Satisfactory  county  schools  cannot  possibly  be  main- 
tained on  a  local  levy  of  15  cents  on  each  $100;  in  fact, 
every  county  of  the  state  spends  in  excess  of  this  rate. 
This  limitation  practically  transfers  the  control  of  school 
finances  from  the  County  School  Board  to  the  county 
commissioners:  thus,  while  the  county  school  boards  are, 
both  by  law  and  by  the  people,  held  responsible  for  the 
schools,  they  are  in  practice  deprived  of  the  financial 
power  to  meet  their  responsibility. 


3 
o 
J3 

"o 
o 
-a 
u 


a) 

O 
O 


THE  COUNTY  SCHOOL  AUTHORITIES         35 

The  result  is  easily  foreseen.  The  county  commis- 
sioners are  also  a  political  body.  Elected  as  they  not 
infrequently  are  upon  a  platform  of  economy,  and  having, 
as  is  human,  their  own  political  future  as  well  as  that  of 
their  party  in  view,  they  often  give  scant  attention  to  the 
requests  of  the  county  school  boards  for  funds  in  excess  of 
15  cents  on  the  $100,  quite  regardless  of  the  merits  of  the 
application.  The  records  of  every  county  in  the  state 
show  how  seldom  the  full  requests  of  the  school  boards 
for  funds  are  granted  by  the  county  commissioners. 
Here  and  there  a  school  board,  on  easy  terms  with  the 
commissioners,  makes  no  formal  request  for  funds;  the 
subject  is  talked  over  informally  and  an  agreement 
reached.  Elsewhere,  requests  are  cut  year  after  year, 
even  in  the  face  of  the  fact  that  in  some  instances  the 
schools  are  kept  open  by  county  boards  by  means  of 
current  loans.  Where  the  commissioners  and  the 
majority  of  the  school  board  happen  to  be  of  the  same 
political  faith,  the  school  board  members  are  at  times 
asked  to  modify  their  requests  on  the  grounds  of  party 
loyalty  or  political  expediency.  Even  the  county 
superintendents  do  not  escape.  Persons  with  powerful 
political  connections  have  been  known  to  appeal  to  them, 
to  reclassify  teachers,  in  order  to  lower  their  salaries,  and 
thus  reduce  the  amount  of  money  needed  by  the  County 
School  Board.  In  one  instance  that  came  to  our  notice 
the  teachers  were  actually  reclassified;  in  another,  occur- 
ring in  the  spring  of  191 5,  be  it  said  to  the  honor  of  the 
Superintendent,  the  intermediary  was  defied  to  do  his 


36         PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

worst.  To  protect  the  schools  against  such  dangers, 
five  of  the  larger  counties  of  the  state  have  secured  from 
the  General  Assembly  special  legislation  rendering  man- 
datory a  higher  levy  by  the  board  of  county  commissioners 
than  that  provided  by  the  general  law.  Thus,  Allegany 
may  make  a  levy  of  31  cents  on  $100  for  usual  expenses, 
and  an  additional  7  cents  for  buildings ;  Baltimore  County 
may  levy  31  cents  and  9  cents,  respectively;  while  Mont- 
gomery County  requires  its  county  commissioners  to 
meet  any  demand  made  by  the  school  board  for  the 
support  of  the  elementary  schools.  In  Frederick  and 
Prince  George  counties  the  school  authorities  secured 
local  laws  providing  for  larger  teachers'  salaries,  and  the 
county  commissioners  are  required  to  levy  the  necessary 
funds. 

The  most  serious  difficulties  are  usually  encountered 
when  funds  are  requested  for  the  erection  of  new  school- 
houses.  A  few  boards  of  county  commissioners  make 
such  allowance,  but  only  a  few.  It  does  not  follow  that 
the  rest  get  no  money  at  all  for  new  buildings;  they  get  it, 
however,  in  ways  that  are  roundabout  and  inefficient. 
Two  counties — Allegany  and  Baltimore — have  procured 
from  the  legislature  laws  compelling  the  commissioners  to 
make  a  separate  levy  for  buildings.  But  in  the  majority 
of  counties  almost  all  the  money  spent  on  new  buildings 
within  the  last  half  decade  has  been  wrung  from  the 
county  commissioners  through  special  laws,  requiring  a 
levy  or  a  bond  issue.  Indeed,  some  counties — for  ex- 
ample, Calvert,  Charles,  and  St.  Mary's,  have  had  to 


THE  COUNTY  SCHOOL  AUTHORITIES         37 

appeal  to  the  General  Assembly  to  secure  funds  even  for 
the  erection  of  schoolhouses  costing  less  than  $600. 

The  methods  used  by  the  county  commissioners  in 
granting  funds  aid  them  to  shirk  their  responsibility. 
The  requests  of  the  school  boards  are  as  a  rule  presented 
by  items;  definite  sums  are  asked  for  new  buildings,  for 
maintenance,  for  teachers,  etc.  But  the  county  com- 
missioners, as  a  rule,  make  a  lump  allowance,  less  than  the 
total  sum  asked  for,  and  generally  omit  to  state  which 
items  have  been  granted  in  full  and  which  cut  or  refused 
altogether.  This  lump  sum  includes,  ordinarily,  enough 
for  teachers'  salaries  and  operating  expenses;  but  for 
years  in  certain  counties — Calvert  and  Charles,  for  in- 
stance— little  has  been  provided  even  for  repairs,  to  say 
nothing  of  the  betterment  of  the  plant,  the  commissioners 
trusting  to  the  members  of  the  County  School  Board  to 
use  their  own  ingenuity  in  keeping  the  schools  open  and 
some  kind  of  roof  over  the  heads  of  the  children.  To 
check  this  way  of  escaping  responsibility,  Montgomery 
County  obtained  special  legislation  which  provides  for  a 
detailed  school  budget  and  compels  the  county  commis- 
sioners to  make  their  allowances  by  items. 

Such  funds  as  the  school  boards  obtain  are  usually 
administered  with  somewhat  more  than  ordinary  effi- 
ciency. Engaged  in  business  and  in  commercial  farming, 
as  the  great  majority  of  the  members  are,  it  is  natural 
that  they  should  take  a  close  interest  in  the  business 
aspects  of  education.  The  county  unit  facilitates  the 
use  of  intelligent  methods  of  accounting,  and  perhaps 


v> 


S  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  LX  MARYLAND 


explains  the  introduction  of  a  uniform  accounting  system 
throughout  the  state.  Bills  are  audited  by  the  Board 
members,  and  accounts  are  kept  by  the  County  Superin- 
tendent, the  assistant  superintendent,  or  the  clerk.  In  a 
few  cases — Allegany  County,  for  instance — these  ac- 
counts are  examined  monthly  by  an  outside  accountant; 
usually,  however,  this  outside  audit  is  made  once  a  year, 
as  in  Howard  County;  however,  there  are  a  few  counties 
— Garrett  is  an  example — where  no  audit  at  all  is  made 
by  an  outside  agency. 

More  or  less  uniformitv  of  method  has  also  been  de- 
veloped  in  handling  routine  matters  of  school  supplies, 
fuel,  and  repairs.  In  some  counties  a  blank  is  employed 
by  the  district  trustees  to  indicate  to  the  County  Board 
what  repairs,  etc.,  are  deemed  necessary.  Elsewhere  the 
County  Board  members  make  visits  with  the  County 
Superintendent  to  decide  what  repairs  are  to  be  under- 
taken. Occasionally  as  much  as  a  week  is  thus  spent. 
On  jobs  of  sufficient  magnitude  competitive  bids  are 
received.  Work  done  under  contract  is  supervised  by 
the  County  Superintendent  or  his  assistant;  if  a  local  man 
is  employed  he  is  more  often  subject  to  the  direction  of 
the  district  trustees.  In  our  judgment  these  details  are, 
as  a  rule,  honestly  and  efficiently  managed. 

The  building  problem  has  been  less  happily  handled. 
The  situation  is  obviously  not  a  simple  one.  Funds  are 
limited;  old  buildings  can  neither  be  torn  down  nor 
reconstructed  to  keep  pace  with  modern  notions  of 
construction,  as  to  size  of  classrooms,  lighting,  cloak- 


THE  COUNTY  SCHOOL  AUTHORITIES         39 

rooms,  heating  arrangements,  closets,  etc.  On  the  other 
hand,  these  difficulties  make  it  all  the  more  imperative 
that  new  buildings  should  be  soundly  planned  and  that 
repairs  and  remodelling  should  be  carried  on  with  up-to- 
date  models  in  mind.  The  State  Department  should 
exercise  a  general  control  over  building  operations,  as  it 
does  in  Minnesota,  for  example.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
the  state  has  no  policy  and  only  a  few  counties,  Allegany, 
Baltimore,  Wicomico,  and  Queen  Anne's,  among  them, 
handle  this  problem  with  intelligence.  As  for  the  rest, 
schoolhouses  of  obsolete  type  are  still  constructed,  just 
as  though  standard  types,  soundly  planned  in  respect  to 
light,  hygiene,  drainage,  etc.,  had  not  been  evolved  and 
were  not  elsewhere  in  use.  District  School  No.  3,  re- 
cently built  in  the  third  school  district  of  Calvert  County, 
shows  less  appreciation  of  sound  principles  of  school 
architecture  than  was  shown  in  the  erection  of  certain 
schoolhouses  in  the  same  county  fifty  years  ago ;  the  new 
consolidated  schoolhouse  at  Clarksville,  Howard  County, 
ignores  the  principles  of  good  lighting;  city  school  build- 
ings costing  from  $12,000  to  $15,000  and  disregarding 
modern  ideas  as  to  hygiene  and  sanitation  have  recently 
been  erected  at  North  East,  Cecil  County;  at  St.  Mich- 
aels, Talbot  County;  at  Accident,  Garrett  County,  and 
at  Federalsburg,  Caroline  County. 

Highly  objectionable  is  a  practice,  not  altogether  in- 
frequent, by  which  both  County  Board  and  County 
Superintendent  have  been  completely  deprived  of  con- 
trol in  certain  cases.    Buildings  were  needed,  for  example, 


4o         PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

at  Hyattsville,  Prince  George  County,  and  at  Kennedy- 
ville,  Kent  County.  The  county  commissioners  refused 
the  necessary  funds.  "Influential"  citizens  then  ap- 
pealed to  the  General  Assembly  which  was  thus  induced 
to  pass  special  legislation  making  mandatory  upon  the 
county  commissioners  the  raising  of  the  sum  desired. 
In  both  the  instances  under  discussion  the  acts  named  a 
local  committee  to  have  charge  of  the  construction. 
Such  legislation  is  absolutely  pernicious.  It  encourages 
legislative  favoritism  and  log-rolling,  destroys  local  re- 
sponsibility, discourages  systematic  planning  by  the 
county  authorities,  lodges  control  in  inexpert  hands,  and 
in  the  end  produces  an  obsolete  school  building  at  great 
expense.  For  this  reason  the  buildings  erected  at 
Hyattsville  and  Kennedyville  are  defective  in  respect  to 
ventilating,  lighting,  and  internal  arrangement. 

We  have  already  mentioned  the  fact  that  the  county 
school  boards  appoint  district  school  trustees,  who  choose 
and  may  remove  the  principal  teacher.  Politically 
selected  county  boards  are,  of  course,  apt  to  choose  the 
district  trustees  on  a  partisan  basis.  The  way  is  thus 
open  for  the  introduction  of  politics  into  the  management 
of  every  school.  As  a  rule,  the  district  trustees  do  little. 
They  do  not  meet  to  talk  over  school  affairs  with  the 
teacher;  they  take  no  especial  interest  in  the  schoolhouse 
or  the  school  grounds.  They  wake  up,  however,  when  a 
teacher  is  to  be  appointed  or  dismissed,  but  the  danger  is 
great  that  their  action  will  not  be  based  purely  on  educa- 
tional considerations. 


THE  COUNTY  SCHOOL  AUTHORITIES         41 

We  have  in  a  previous  chapter  discussed  the  relation 
of  the  State  Board  of  Education  to  the  State  Superintend- 
ent; its  counterpart  is  to  be  found  in  the  relation  of  the 
County  Board  to  the  County  Superintendent.  The 
County  Board  is  a  small,  lay,  unpaid  body,  composed  of 
farmers,  business  men,  physicians,  or  lawyers,  more  or  less 
interested  in  public  education  and  more  or  less  competent 
to  look  after  it  in  a  general  way,  but  necessarily  without 
professional  knowledge  or  experience.  Under  these  cir- 
cumstances, while  accepting  from  the  state  department 
their  general  policies,  they  look  to  the  county  superin- 
tendent for  local  leadership.  Thus  far,  we  have  dis- 
cussed mainly  the  composition  of  the  county  boards  and 
the  transaction  of  certain  business  matters — the  raising 
of  funds  and  the  erection  of  buildings — as  to  all  of  which 
we  conclude  that  Maryland  derives  less  benefit  than  it 
should  and  might  from  its  superior  type  of  school  admin- 
istration. There  remain  to  be  considered  the  ways  in 
which  the  county  boards  discharge  their  specifically 
educational  responsibilities.  This  can,  however,  be  most 
advantageously  discussed  in  connection  with  the  County 
Superintendent,  to  which  subject  the  next  chapter  will 
be  devoted. 


V.  THE  COUNTY  SUPERINTENDENT  OF 

SCHOOLS 

THE  County  Superintendent  of  Schools  occupies 
in  respect  to  the  county  schools  the  same  posi- 
tion as  the  City  Superintendent  occupies  in 
respect  to  the  city  schools.  He  is  the  expert  adviser  of 
the  County  School  Board  on  all  matters  of  educational 
policy;  he  supplies  professional  inspiration  to  the  teaching 
staff  of  the  county;  he  must  be  the  organizer  and  leader  of 
public  opinion  if  increasing  popular  support  and  inter- 
est are  to  be  won.  In  addition,  as  secretary- treasurer  of 
the  County  Board  he  is  its  business  representative  and 
executive  agent  in  financial  and  other  matters. 

What  kind  of  person  must  the  County  Superintendent 
be  if  he  is  to  fulfill  these  specifications?  If  the  County 
Superintendent  is  to  be  the  source  of  professional  inspira- 
tion and  popular  leadership,  he  must  be  a  trained  educa- 
tor, familiar  with  modern  ideas  as  to  curriculum,  method, 
and  supervision;  he  must  be  a  man  of  weight  in  the 
community ;  he  must  command  the  respect  of  the  County 
Board;  and  he  must  hold  his  office  long  enough  to  develop 
an  educational  program.  Even  so,  it  is  clear  that 
no  one  person  can  himself  perform  all  the  duties  of 
the  County  Superintendent.    The  County  Superintend- 

42 


THE  COUNTY  SUPERINTENDENT  43 

ent  must  therefore  have  at  least  a  minimum  of  clerical 
and  professional  assistance — a  specialized  "staff"  of 
modest  proportions. 

Now,  what  are  the  facts?  The  county  superintend- 
ents are  elected  by  the  politically  constituted  county 
boards.  The  politicians  view  the  county  superintend- 
ency  as  "spoils, "  and  in  most  counties  the  indifference  of 
the  people  permits  them  to  dispose  of  it  on  that  basis. 
A  general  election,  bringing  about  a  change  in  party 
control,  is  scarcely  over  before  political  candidates  are 
brought  forth  and  "groomed"  for  this  important  office. 
In  the  four  years  during  which  the  Republicans  were  in 
power — 1 896  -1 900 — new  county  superintendents  were 
chosen  in  19  out  of  the  23  counties  of  the  state,  1 1  of  them 
in  the  very  year  when  the  county  school  boards  became 
Republican.  In  the  first  year  of  the  new  Democratic 
administration  of  1900,  16  new  county  superintendents 
were  appointed,  whereas  during  the  ensuing  11  years, 
aside  from  removals  by  death,  there  was  a  total  of  only 
1 1  changes.  Similarly,  the  first  three  years  of  the  present 
Republican  control  witnessed  the  election  of  12  new 
superintendents.  Some  of  these  changes  were  indeed 
for  the  better;  but  as  long  as  a  political  upset  is  the 
inciting  cause,  there  can  be  no  certainty  that  changes 
will  insure  to  the  public  advantage.  Luckily,  these 
deplorable  conditions  are  not  universal.  In  a  few — a 
very  few — counties,  politics,  as  we  shall  shortly  see,  play 
no  part  in  either  the  selection  or  retention  of  the  county 
superintendents.     While  a  dozen  superintendents  have 


44         PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

served  three  years  or  less,  three  have  been  in  office  for 
fourteen  years. 

Though  nothing  can  be  said  in  extenuation  of  the 
county  boards,  in  so  far  as  their  choice  of  the  County 
Superintendent  is  influenced  by  political  considerations, 
it  must  in  fairness  be  added  that  highly  desirable  candi- 
dates would  not  be  likely  to  covet  the  post  in  most 
counties  under  existing  circumstances.  The  law  makes 
no  stipulations  as  to  the  professional  qualifications  or  the 
salary  of  the  incumbent.  Of  23  county  superintendents, 
one  receives  $5,000  a  year,  one  $3,000,  one  $2,250.  Of 
the  remaining  20,  one  receives  $800  a  year,  6  receive  from 
$1,200  to  $1,500,  and  13  from  $1,600  to  $2,000.  In  addi- 
tion there  is  an  allowance  of  from  $100  to  $500  for  ex- 
penses incurred  in  visiting  schools,  though  Garrett 
County  makes  no  allowance,  and  Harford  and  St.  Mary's 
only  $25.  One  cannot  be  surprised,  therefore,  to  find  that 
such  positions  have  not  attracted  trained  men.  In- 
deed, three  county  superintendents  have  had  less  than  a 
high  school  education  and  four  of  them  never  went  be- 
yond the  high  school.  Only  one  of  the  seven  has  added 
to  his  initial  preparation,  and  he  only  to  the  extent  of  six 
weeks  at  a  summer  school.  Of  those  remaining,  one  is  a 
normal  school  graduate  with  a  summer  term  of  profes- 
sional work.  Though  fifteen  hold  college  and  university 
degrees,  yet  not  more  than  six  of  the  fifteen  have  made 
special  and  professional  preparation  for  their  work. 

Conditions  are  aggravated  by  the  almost  universal 
lack  of  competent  assistants.    The  law,  while  permitting 


THE  COUNTY  SUPERINTENDENT  45 

the  county  boards  to  expend  thousands  annually  in  their 
discretion,  forbids  the  employment  of  even  a  clerk  to 
assist  the  Superintendent,  unless  the  number  of  teachers 
in  the  county  exceeds  85;  an  assistant  superintendent 
may  not  be  employed  unless  the  number  of  teachers  ex- 
ceeds 175.  Hence,  five  counties  depend  almost  entirely 
upon  the  County  Superintendent  alone,  employing  only 
occasional  and  temporary  clerical  assistance.  Six  out 
of  the  twenty-three  have  assistant  superintendents,  and 
supervisors  are  found  in  four.  In  only  three  counties — 
Baltimore,  Frederick,  and  Allegany — are  the  offices 
ample  and  well-equipped;  elsewhere  space  is  often 
meagre  and  equipment  usually  limited.  One-fourth  of 
the  county  superintendents  have  but  one  room,  often 
a  small  one  at  that,  which  serves  alike  as  a  store-house 
for  school  supplies,  as  meeting-place  for  the  County 
Board,  and  as  general  office. 

Let  us  now  see  what  happens.  The  County  Superin- 
tendent is,  in  the  first  place,  the  custodian  of  the  records 
of  the  County  Board.  He  conducts  the  correspondence 
with  district  trustees,  teachers,  patrons,  and  the  general 
public.  He  arranges  the  business  to  be  considered  at 
the  regular  monthly  or  special  meetings  and  keeps  min- 
utes of  the  proceedings.  He  collects  such  statistics  from 
the  schools  as  are  required,  answers  all  inquiries  for  in- 
formation, and  prepares  the  annual  report  submitted  to 
the  State  Department  of  Education.  As  treasurer  he  has 
charge  of  funds  varying  from  $28,000  annually  in  the 
smallest  to  $660,000  in  the  largest  county.    He  receives, 


46         PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

and  when  audited  by  the  Board  members  pays,  all  bills; 
keepsallaccounts;purchases,collects,and  distributes  text- 
books and  educational  material,  and  prepares  the  annual 
budget  to  be  presented  to  the  county  commissioners. 

For  lack  of  assistance  and  of  facilities,  clerical  work 
is  too  often  poorly  performed.  In  seven  or  eight  coun- 
ties at  most — Baltimore,  Allegany,  Frederick,  Harford, 
Washington,  Wicomico,  Talbot,  and  Queen  Anne's — 
order  prevails.  In  half  a  dozen  more  the  work  is  fairly 
well  done.  Elsewhere  there  is  a  total  lack  of  system. 
Teachers'  examination  records  are  indeed  preserved, 
but  they  are  inaccessible;  school  reports  are  merely 
bundled  together  and  filed,  little  use  being  made  of  them, 
and  data  are  almost  never  collected  as  to  why  children 
do  not  receive  promotion  or  why  they  attend  school 
irregularly.  The  financial  accounts,  however,  be  it 
said,  while  frequently  handled  in  an  unbusinesslike  man- 
ner, are  nevertheless  carefully  and  accurately  kept. 

The  more  purely  educational  duties  begin  with  main- 
tenance of  the  school  plant.  In  the  smallest  county  of 
the  state — Calvert — the  County  Superintendent  must 
supervise  54  buildings,  scattered  over  216  miles  of  terri- 
tory, and  in  the  largest  (Baltimore)  181,  scattered  over 
an  area  of  650  square  miles.  District  trustees,  being 
the  immediate  custodians  of  their  respective  school- 
houses,  may  spend  on  their  own  authority  upon  upkeep 
and  repairs  $5  in  any  one  term;  larger  expenditures  can 
be  made  only  after  authorization  by  the  County  Board. 
Hence,  anything  costing  more  than  five  dollars — whether 


,*\%ar«*C" 


Substantial,  but  unsanitary  and  unhygienic  rural  school — one  of  many 


Ancient  desks  still  in  use 


THE  COUNTY  SUPERINTENDENT  47 

a  new  fence,  the  grading  of  the  school  grounds,  the  re- 
pair of  an  outhouse,  the  roofing  or  painting  of  the  school- 
house,  a  new  stove  or  new  furniture,  is  referred  to  the 
County  School  Board,  and  the  duty  of  attending  to  such 
matters  devolves  upon  the  County  Superintendent,  who 
investigates  and  reports  upon  the  need,  makes  the 
necessary  purchases,  and  supervises  work  done  under 
contract.  If  a  new  building  is  to  be  erected  the  County 
Superintendent  bears  the  burden  of  acquiring  the 
ground,  drawing  the  plan,  letting  the  contract,  and  look- 
ing after  the  construction  and  equipment. 

Here,  then,  is  a  second  field  of  operations,  much  more 
technical  in  character,  and  sufficiently  extensive  to  con- 
sume almost  all  the  County  Superintendent's  time  and 
energy.  With  what  results?  It  was  stated  in  the  pre- 
ceding chapter  that  neither  the  state  nor  the  county 
pursued  or  could,  with  its  present  staff,  pursue  a  definite 
and  intelligent  policy  in  regard  to  new  school  buildings. 
With  respect  to  sanitation  and  hygiene  there  is  not 
lacking  evidence  that  recent  agitation  has  had  a  bene- 
ficial effect.  School  grounds  have  here  and  there  been 
cleared  of  underbrush,  outhouses  have  been  cleaned  and 
whitewashed,  and  old  buildings  have  been  repaired, 
painted,  and  redecorated.  Nevertheless,  it  remains  true 
that  a.  thoroughly  decent  and  comfortable  rural  school 
plant,  consisting  of  a  neat  school  building,  a  clean  yard, 
and  sanitary  outhouses  is  exceptional.  There  are  in  the 
state  1,935  school  buildings  for  white  children,  550  for 
colored.     In  the  course  of  this  investigation  500  of  the 


48  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

former  were  visited,  50  of  the  latter.  Perhaps  8  per 
cent,  of  those  visited  may  be  called  satisfactory. 

The  duties  thus  far  considered — those  of  the  Secretary 
and  Treasurer  of  the  County  Board  and  those  of  the  cus- 
todian of  the  school  plant,  consume  at  least  three-fourths 
of  the  time  of  the  majority  of  the  county  superintendents 
and  not  less  than  half  of  the  time  of  the  others.  More- 
over, if  the  school  plant  is  to  be  kept  in  proper  order,  this 
drain  will  increase  rather  than  diminish.  In  the  smaller 
counties  relief  can  be  furnished  by  providing  clerical 
assistance  in  the  office  and  a  reliable,  all-round  mechanic 
for  the  field.  The  larger  counties  might  well  follow  the 
example  of  the  cities,  that  is,  employ  a  secretary-treasurer 
to  care  for  the  clerical  work  and  the  accounts  of  the 
Board,  a  business  manager  to  look  after  the  physical  side 
of  the  schools,  and  a  Superintendent,  directly  responsible 
for  the  secretary-treasurer  and  the  business  manager, 
yet  free  to  devote  his  major  energies  to  the  educational 
conduct  of  the  system. 

Important  as  are  good  records  and  neat  schoolhouses, 
the  really  significant  duties  of  the  County  Superintend- 
ent are  educational.  One-half  the  teachers  in  the  rural 
schools  enter  the  service  by  way  of  the  county  examina- 
tions which  he  conducts.  Do  these  examinations  select 
the  best  talent  available?  Do  they  direct  the  candidate's 
attention  in  the  right  direction? 

How  could  they?  How  can  an  untrained  County 
Superintendent  examine  sensibly  and  judiciously  the 
candidates   for   teaching  positions?     How   can   an   un- 


Unsanitary,  unhygienic,  and  neglected  outhouses 


THE  COUNTY  SUPERINTENDENT  49 

trained  County  Superintendent  indicate  by  the  character 
of  the  examination  the  line  of  preparation  which  pros- 
pective teachers  should  follow?  The  situation,  be  it 
granted,  is  not  easy.  Salaries  are  low — ranging  from  an 
average  of  $271  a  year  in  St.  Mary's  to  $662  a  year  in 
Baltimore  County.  Three  counties  pay  an  average  of 
less  than  $300;  four  less  than  $350;  seven  less  than 
$400;  seven  less  than  $450;  and  only  two,  Allegany  and 
Baltimore,  pay  in  excess  of  $450.  In  counties  with  few 
or  poor  high  schools  the  probable  candidates  will  be  the 
abler  boys  and  girls  who  have  lingered  an  extra  year  in 
the  grades  or  in  the  rural  schools;  high  school  graduates 
will  be  applicants  only  in  counties  well  supplied  with 
secondary  school  facilities.  But  these  inherent  difficul- 
ties make  it  all  the  more  important  that  the  County 
Superintendent  should  be  able,  by  reason  of  his  training 
and  experience,  to  make  the  best  of  a  bad  situation.  The 
untrained  official  does  not  and  cannot  do  this. 

He  fails  also,  and  for  the  same  reason,  to  use  such 
opportunities  as  he  possesses  for  the  improvement  of  his 
teaching  corps.  Teacher  certificates  issued  by  the  County 
Superintendent  on  the  basis  of  the  examinations  just  dis- 
cussed are,  in  the  first  instance,  probationary,  good  for 
only  six  months.  At  the  end  of  this  period  the  County 
Superintendent  may  cancel  the  certificate,  require  an- 
other examination,  or  issue,  in  lieu  of  the  probationary 
certificate,  one  valid  for  five  years.  The  discretion  of 
the  County  Superintendent  in  respect  to  the  re- 
examination of  teachers  thus  gives  him  the  power  to  in- 


PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IX  MARYLAND 

upon  further  ;  ~  Eessi  :.al  preparation.  He  possesses 
also  an  even  more  potent  instrument.  The  minimum 
salary  h.  i :  raaranteec  I    teachers  ranked  by  the 

.         S  .iperintenden:  as  first     lass  a  higher  minimum 
_-.    than  ws  -         vided  for  other  tea        3      Thus 
ati   e  financial  inducement      ls     fered  to  all  teachers 
themselves.     Wherever  .   unty  superintend- 
dared  to  use  thei:      ."ate  authority   the 
-  _>een  excellent.     The  enrolment  in  the  Mary- 
I  Teachers'  Reading  Circle  has  increased,  the  Teach- 
eis]  Institute  and  Teachers'  Meetings  have  been  taken 
more  seriously,  and  teachers  in  larger  numbers  have  at 
their  own  expen?  ided  the  summer  session  of  nor- 

mal schools  and  colleges. 

Unfortunately,  however  very  few  county  superin- 
tendents have  acted.  The  holder  of  the  probationary 
certificatf  Ls  -  iom  dropped  and  only  occasionally  re- 
nined.  The  salary  bonus  is  also  usually  wasted. 
Partly  because  of  the  lack  of  professional  ideals,  partly 
because  of  the  generally  low  salary  scale,  superintendents 
commonly  award  the  salary  increase  to  teachers  of  long 
service  and  local  favor  instead  of  using  it  as  a  lever  to 
lift  the  profession.  On  the  whole,  therefore,  it  is  fair 
I  say  that  the  County-  Superintendent  usually  leaves  the 
teaching  profession  just  about  where  he  finds  it. 

The  teacher  is  the  first — and  the  most  important — 
factor  in  securing  good  teaching.  The  second  is  supervi- 
sion. The  teachers  of  a  school  or  of  a  school  system  are 
molded  into  an  efficient  team  animated  by  one  purpose 


THE  COUNTY  SUPERINTENDENT  51 


and  working  toward  a  common  end  very  largely  by  the 
pressure,  guidance,  and  inspiration  of  the  supervisors. 
It  is  one  of  the  advantages  of  large  cities  that  supervision 
is  easily  provided;  it  is  among  the  most  serious  flaws  in 
the  district  system  that  supervision  is  well-nigh  impossi- 
ble. Maryland's  county  educational  organization  fa- 
cilitates effective  supervision,  embracing  town  and 
country  schools  alike.  For  the  area  is  large,  the  schools 
varied  in  type,  the  financial  resources  more  or  less  sub- 
stantial, and  the  authority  of  the  County  Board  unques- 
tioned. But  even  a  trained  Superintendent  cannot,  in 
addition  to  his  other  duties,  take  upon  himself,  except 
in  the  very  smallest  counties,  the  details  of  classroom 
supervision.  He  requires  for  this  purpose  a  small  but 
highly  specialized  staff. 

Once  more,  the  possibilities  of  the  situation  are  in  this 
matter  almost  entirely  unrealized.  Supervisors,  includ- 
ing assistant  superintendents,  are  employed  in  only 
7  of  the  23  counties1;  and  of  the  assistant  superintendents, 
two,  perhaps  one  might  say  three,  are  engaged  in  clerical 
work.  To  be  sure,  in  addition  to  these  7  counties,  one 
county  uses  a  portion  of  the  state  appropriation  for 
Colored  Industrial  Schools  to  employ  a  part-time  super- 
visor2 and  another  is  making  a  limited  use  of  high  school 
teachers3  for  the  same  purpose.     In  short,  the  teachers 


■Allegany,  Baltimore,  Caroline,  Dorchester,  Frederick,  Montgomery, 
and  Prince  George. 
2Anne  Arundel. 
3Queen  Anne. 


52  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

of  1 6  out  of  the  23  counties  receive  no  supervisory  as- 
sistance other  than  that  given  by  the  County  Superin- 
tendent, and  but  three  counties,  Allegany,  Baltimore, 
and  Frederick  have  anything  like  an  adequate  super- 
visory force.  The  failure  to  provide  adequate  super- 
vision is  attributed  by  the  county  boards  to  the  lack  of 
funds.  Too  true.  But  lack  of  funds  is  not  fundamental. 
At  bottom  lack  of  supervision  is  due  in  most  counties, 
not  so  much  to  financial  inability,  as  to  a  lack  of  appre- 
ciation of  the  significance  of  efficient  supervision  on  the 
part  of  the  Board  and  of  the  Superintendent  who  has 
failed  to  lead  the  Board. 

Of  the  three  counties  above  mentioned  Baltimore 
County  must  be  singled  out  for  especial  commendation. 
The  County  Superintendent  is  a  man  of  experience  and 
modern  training;  and  he  is  aided  by  a  corps  of  supervisors, 
including  an  assistant  superintendent,  a  primary  super- 
visor with  an  assistant,  a  grammar  grade  supervisor 
with  an  assistant,  a  manual  training  supervisor,  a  domes- 
tic science  supervisor,  and,  finally,  a  supervisor  of  rural 
schools.  Working  as  a  team,  they  have  not  only  im- 
proved the  schools,  they  have  also  developed  a  public 
sentiment  which  demands  increasingly  better  schools, 
better  instruction,  better  trained  and  better  paid  teach- 
ers. The  teaching  body  of  the  county  is  permeated  by 
genuine  enthusiasm.  Every  improvement  effected  makes 
itself  felt  practically  throughout  the  county.  The  situ- 
ation is,  of  course,  still  far  from  homogeneous,  but  it  is 
developing  steadily  in  the  right  direction.     What  Balti- 


THE  COUNTY  SUPERINTENDENT  53 

more  County  has  accomplished  cannot  be  literally  dupli- 
cated in  counties  with  more  limited  resources.  But 
every  county  in  Maryland  could,  up  to  the  limits  of 
its  financial  ability,  do  the  kind  of  thing  that  Baltimore 
County  does.  At  bottom  it  depends  on  the  competency 
of  the  County  Superintendent. 

In  counties  without  supervisors,  whatever  there  is  of 
personal  supervision  depends  upon  the  county  superin- 
tendents who  are  required  by  law  to  visit  the  schools. 
But  the  number  of  reported  visits  is  no  index  to  the 
amount  of  effective  supervision  performed.  These  visits 
are  usually  brief  and  of  a  business  or  inspectorial  char- 
acter. The  Superintendent  calls  to  look  after  the 
physical  plant  or  to  classify  a  teacher  on  the  basis  of  a 
hasty  inspection.  This  is  not  "supervision"  in  the 
sense  which  the  term  bears  in  these  pages. 

The  County  Superintendent  also  comes  into  touch 
with  the  teaching  force  at  the  teachers'  meetings  and 
conferences  held  throughout  the  state  at  least  quarterly. 
Here  again  one  notices  the  difference  between  counties 
lacking  and  counties  possessing  proper  supervision.  In 
the  former  the  occasion  is  apt  to  be  devoted  to  generali- 
ties—to the  discussion  of  plans  or  to  exhortations  on 
general  lines.  In  the  supervised  counties  the  confer- 
ences between  Superintendent,  supervisory  staff,  and 
teaching  body  are  of  an  intensive  character.  Definite 
problems  are  formulated  and  presented.  A  lesson 
actually  given  by  way  of  illustrating  the  use  of  materials 
and  methods  of  presentation  is  made  the  basis  of  dis- 


54  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

cussion.  Or  the  teachers  are  divided  into  groups  accord- 
ing as  they  teach  in  rural  or  urban  schools,  in  the  lower 
or  in  the  upper  grades,  and  attention  is  centred  upon 
questions  of  interest  to  particular  groups.  With  one  group 
it  may  be  discipline,  with  another  how  to  teach  beginners 
reading,  and  with  still  another  what  arithmetic  should 
be  taught.  The  County  Superintendent  can  thus  em- 
ploy the  strong  teachers  to  strengthen  the  weak.  The 
entire  body  is  in  this  way  professionalized.  But,  obvi- 
ously, such  organization  and  endeavor  presuppose  a 
trained  leader  and  a  trained  staff. 

In  still  another  important  respect  is  the  County  Super- 
intendent charged  with  direct  responsibility  for  the  work 
of  the  classroom.  He  is  required  by  law  to  prepare  semi- 
annual examination  questions  for  all  the  schools  of  the 
county,  the  second,  or  June  examination,  serving  as  the 
basis  of  promotion.  Now  examinations  may  serve 
several  purposes:  they  may,  for  instance,  ascertain  what 
children  know  and  how  freely  they  can  use  their  knowl- 
edge; but  their  main  function  is  to  guide  the  teacher; 
for  by  the  examinations  he  sets,  the  County  Superin- 
tendent tells  the  teacher  the  kind  of  instruction  she  should 
give,  the  things  she  should  emphasize,  and  the  habits  of 
thought  and  action  in  which  children  should  be  trained. 

As  one  would  expect  from  our  account  of  the  quali- 
fications and  resources  of  the  county  superintendents, 
the  current  examinations  belong  in  most  counties  to  an 
obsolete  type.  By  demanding  from  children  isolated  and 
unrelated  facts  and  meaningless  definitions,  they  do  in- 


Mure  outhouses 


THE  COUNTY  SUPERINTENDENT  55 

calculable  harm  to  instruction.  As  the  child's  failure  or 
promotion  depends  upon  them,  even  teachers  capable 
of  something  better  are  forced  to  defer  to  them.  They 
must,  therefore,  rush  their  pupils  in  the  most  superficial 
manner  over  the  assignment  for  the  year,  in  order  to 
have  three  and  even  four  months  free  for  the  reviews 
necessary  for  the  June  examination.  It  is  indeed  not 
uncommon  for  teachers  to  give  children  the  task  of  find- 
ing the  answers  to  sets  of  examination  questions  running 
back  for  years  and  to  have  them  write  out  these  answers 
and  commit  them  to  memory,  as  an  effective  preparation 
for  the  coming  tests! 

A  single  topic  remains  to  be  briefly  considered  before 
this  chapter  can  be  brought  to  a  close.  The  law  re- 
quires the  preparation  and  publication  annually  of  a 
county  school  report,  exhibiting  the  financial  transac- 
tions of  the  Board  and  containing  data  bearing  on  enrol- 
ment, attendance,  etc.  The  county  report  might  be  an 
attractive  document,  serving  as  a  means  of  communica- 
tion between  the  Board  and  the  community.  It  might 
depict  conditions,  record  progress,  explain  policy,  and 
stimulate  interest.  It  does,  as  a  rule,  nothing  of  the 
sort.  The  county  reports  are  usually  in  Maryland — as 
elsewhere — dull  pamphlets  throwing  little  light  on  educa- 
tional problems. 

In  the  course  of  our  description  and  criticism  of  the 
County  Superintendent  the  needs  of  the  situation  have 
been  clearly  implied.  Effective  schools  require  skilled 
and  specialized  leadership.     Maryland  must  define  in  the 


56  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

statute  the  qualifications  of  the  County  Superintendent. 
It  must  go  into  the  open  market  to  get  him.  Having 
found  him,  the  county  must  give  him  a  decent  salary, 
assured  tenure,  and  at  least  a  minimum  of  clerical  and 
professional  help. 


VI.     THE  TEACHERS 

BOARDS,  whether  state  or  county,  superintend- 
ents and  supervisors,  all  have  their  part  to  play 
in  education;  but  they  strive  to  little  purpose, 
except  through  well-trained  and  carefully  selected  teach- 
ers. Disregarding,  for  the  moment,  the  influence  of 
adequate  supervision,  the  efficiency  of  the  schools  de- 
pends upon  the  preparation  of  the  teachers  and  upon  the 
intelligence  with  which  teachers  are  chosen.  There  are 
reasons  for  exercising  unusual  watchfulness  in  Maryland, 
for  the  law  guarantees  what  is  tantamount  to  unlimited 
tenure.     Once  appointed,  removal  is  in  practice  rare. 

What  safeguards  may  an  American  state  wisely  set 
up  in  respect  to  the  training  and  selection  of  its  teaching 
body?  The  problem  is  by  no  means  a  simple  one.  The 
public  school  system  consists  of  schools  of  many  types — 
urban  elementary  schools,  rural  elementary  schools,  in- 
dustrial schools,  and  high  schools..  One  sort  of  teacher 
is  needed  for  the  graded  city  school;  a  modified  type  is 
needed  for  the  ungraded  rural  school.  The  teacher  of 
high  school  Latin  needs  a  different  equipment  from  the 
teacher  of  high  school  physics ;  the  teacher  of  high  school 
physics  needs  a  different  preparation  from  that  of  the 
teacher  of  industrial  art  or  domestic  science  in  elementary 

57 


58  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

or  high  schools.  Differentiation  of  function  thus  requires 
within  limits  specialization  in  training.  We  say  ad- 
visedly "within  limits,"  for  all  teachers  of  a  given 
rank  ought  to  base  their  professional  training  on  a  cer- 
tain common  educational  background  or  experience. 
All  teachers  in  the  elementary  schools,  city  or  country, 
should  possess  something  like  a  high  school  education  fol- 
lowed by  normal  school  training;  all  high  school  teachers 
— certainly  in  the  usual  branches,  should  possess  a  higher 
education.  Otherwise,  the  teaching  force  will  be  little 
above  the  level  to  which  it  hopes  to  elevate  the  pupils! 
Exceptions  do  indeed  occur.  There  are  some  good  teach- 
ers who  have  received  little  training  and  some  poor  teach- 
ers who  have  received  much.  But  public  school  systems 
that  turn  the  exception  into  the  rule  make  precisely  the 
showing  that,  as  we  shall  now  see,  is  made  by  Maryland. 
There  are  in  Maryland,  exclusive  of  Baltimore,  3,467 
white  and  672  colored  teachers.  Accurate  information 
was  obtained  as  to  the  professional  training  of  3,338  white 
teachers  (96  per  cent,  of  the  whole)  and  505  colored 
teachers  (75  per  cent,  of  the  whole)  both  before  and 
after  they  entered  the  profession.  Regarding  the  train- 
ing of  these  teachers,  no  general  statement  can  be  made 
at  all.  There  are  the  widest  possible  variations  in  the 
training  of  teachers  doing  the  same  grade  of  work — incon- 
ceivable confusion  and  lack  of  sequence  and  order  in  their 
preparation.  For  example,  some  teachers  had  entered 
the  normal  schools  after  high  school  graduation,  as  they 
should;  but  someof  themhad  enteredfrom  the  first,  second, 


THE  TEACHERS 


59 


or  third  high  school  year,  and  not  a  few  went  straight 
from  the  elementary  schools.  Some  went  from  the  ele- 
mentary schools  to  college  in  order  to  study  "education" ; 
others  spent  a  year  or  two  in  a  normal  school  and  then 


FIG.   I 
PREPARATION   OF    ELEMENTARY 


TEACHERS    (WHITE) 


entered  college;  still  others  reversed  this  last-mentioned 
process !  There  is  no  rhyme  or  reason  in  what  has  been 
taking  place.  Of  over  3,000  white  elementary  teachers 
in  the  state  outside  of  Baltimore  (Fig.  1)  391  (12.7  per 
cent.)  have  had  only  an  elementary  school  education; 
634  (20.7  per  cent.)  have  spent  one  or  two  years  in  a  high 


6o 


PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 


school;  1,031  (33.7  per  cent.)  have  completed  a  four- 
year  high  school  course;  only  148 — less  than  5  per  cent, 
of  the  whole — have  received  a  standard  normal  school 
training.  Of  the  rest,  some  have  spent  a  little  while  in 
normal  school;  some  have  received  an  irregular  normal 
schooling;  a  few  have  been  to  college  and  still  fewer 
through  college.1  Grouping  together  standard  normal 
school,  part  college,  and  college  graduates,  about  10  per 
cent,  of  the  elementary  teachers  of  Maryland — not  more 
— may  be  called  well  trained;  not  quite  one- third  could 
on  a  stretch  be  called  fairly  well  trained;  at  least  one- 
third  are  practically  untrained.  The  body  as  a  whole  is 
thus  heterogeneous  to  the  last  degree.2  How  could 
it  possibly  function  as  a  unit  in  carrying  out  a  well- 
conceived  educational  policy,  even  if  there  were  one?3 

1I.  e.,  have  had  a  regular  high  school  education  or  its  equivalent  fol- 
lowed by  a  college  course. 

2To  say  nothing  of  classes  prior  to  1910,  of  the  last  six  graduating  classes 
of  the  Maryland  State  Normal  Schools,  less  than  40  per  cent,  entered 
from  standard  high  schools. 

3In  the  following  table  the  figures  are  grouped: 

table  1 
preparation  of  elementary  teachers  (white) 


Kind  of  Preparation 

Elementary  School 
Part  High  School     .      .      . 
Standard  High  School  . 
Part  Normal  Course 
Non-standard  Normal  Course 
Standard  Normal  Course    . 

Part  College 

College 

Grand  Total      .      .      . 


Number 


391 

634 

1,031 

82 

614 

148 

98 

65 


3,063 


Per  cent. 


12.7 

20.7 

33.7 

2.7 

20. 

4.8 

3.2 

2.1 


99.9 


Cumulative 
Per  cent. 


12.7 
33.4 
67.1 
69.8 
89.8 
94.6 
97.8 
99.9 


THE  TEACHERS 


61 


The  colored  elementary  teachers,  including  the  super- 
visors, make  a  better  showing  than  might  have  been 
anticipated.  (Fig.  2.)  Eight  per  cent,  appear  to  have 
received  a  standard  normal  training.  In  view  of  the 
fact  that  there  is  not  a  single  colored  high  school  in  the 
state  outside  of  the  city  of  Baltimore  and  the  local 
facilities  for  training  colored  teachers  are  extremely 
meagre,  this  is  a  surprising  fact.1  To  some  extent  it  may 
be  accounted  for  on  the  ground  that,  while  the  returns 
for  the  white  teachers  are  practically  complete,  reports 
were  received  from  only  three-fourths  of  the  colored 
teachers.  This  was  not  due  to  negligence  on  the  part  of 
the  county  superintendents,  but  to  the  fact  that  many 
colored  schools  had  closed  for  the  year  before  the  blanks 
calling  for  data  on  teacher  preparation  were  received, 
making  it  impossible  to  secure  the  requested  information. 
Complete  returns  from  the  colored  teachers  would  prob- 
ably lessen  the  per  cent,  of  those  adequately  trained. 


^The  exact  figures  are  as  follows: 


table  n 

PREPARATION   OF   ELEMENTARY   AND  SPECIAL   TEACHERS    (COLORED) 


Kind  of  Preparation 

Number 

Per  cent. 

Cumulative 
Per  cent. 

Part  High  School 

Non-standard  Normal  Course       .... 
Part  College 

78 
99 

110 
25 

114 
40 
18 
21 

15.4 

19.6 

21.8 

4.9 

22.5 

7.9 

3.6 

4.2 

15.4 

35. 

56.8 

61.7 

84.2 

92.1 

95.7 

College 

99.9 

Grand  Total 

505 

99.9 

62 


PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 


The  teachers  in  the  high  schools  are  of  two  kinds: 
regular  teachers,  (i.  e.,  those  handling  the  older  studies) 
and  special  teachers  (i.  e.,  those  working  in  manual 
training,  domestic  science,  agriculture,  and  the  commer- 


FIG.    2 


PREPARATION  OF  ELEMENTARY  AND  SPECIAL  TEACHERS(  COLORE^ 


cial  branches) .  It  has  been  stated  above  that  high  school 
teachers  ought  to  be  college  graduates  who  have  also  had 
a  certain  amount  of  professional  training.  But  it  would 
be  unfair  to  apply  this  standard  to  Maryland — or  to 
most  other  states,  for  the  high  school  movement  is  so 
recent  and  has  developed  so  rapidly  that  professionally, 


V 

u 


11 


0) 

>. 

OJ 

"o 

O 


THE  TEACHERS 


63 


trained  teachers  have  been  unobtainable.  Separate  pro- 
fessional training  may  therefore  be  ignored.  Never- 
theless, despite  this  concession,  Maryland  makes  an  un- 
satisfactory showing.    (Fig.  3.)    Not  exceeding  two-fifths 

FIG.  3 
PKZPASATION   OF  REGULAR  HIGH  SCHOOL    TEACHER 


*>^* 

/  HON  5TANPARD  lS.t^ 
/             ^W^    NORMAL     / 

*                     \ 

fey                 \ 

"V    5TANPARP       \ 
J  HIGH  SCHOOL       \ 
13.1  f.       ^^\ 

\       PAK.T 
\        20.77. 

^-^ARTHIGH  5CHO0U 
■'"^        5.11.                    "; 

V       COLLEGE 

FULL    37 4  %                        / 

of  the  regular  high  school  teachers  of  the  state  may  be 
described  as  adequately  prepared;  a  second  two-fifths  are 
from  one  to  four  years  short,  though  they  have  had  some 
kind  of  training — a  partial  college  or  normal  school  course, 
for  example;  the  remaining  fifth  are  wofully  lacking  in 


64 


PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 


proper  preparation,  being  made  up  of  those  who  have  had 
only  a  high  school  education,  a  part  of  a  normal  course,  or 
some  similarly  inadequate  and  ill-adjusted  preparation.1 
In  reference  to  teachers  of  special  high  school  branches 
— manual  training,  domestic  science,  agriculture,  and 
commercial  subjects,  it  was  not  possible  to  ascertain 
what  specialized  training  teachers  had  had.  We  were 
compelled,  therefore,  to  limit  our  inquiry  to  their  general 
rather  than  their  particular  fitness.     On  this  basis2  less 

^able  rn 

PREPARATION  OF   REGULAR   HIGH   SCHOOL   TEACHERS 


Kind  of  Preparation 


Elementary  School    . 
Part  High  School     .      .      . 
Standard  High  School 
Part  Normal  Course 
Non-standard  Normal  Course 
Standard  Normal  Course    . 

Part  College 

College 

Grand  Total 


Number 


2 

u 

36 
5 

51 
7 

57 
103 


275 


Per  cent. 


.7 
5.1 

13.1 
1.8 

18.6 
2.5 

20.7 

37.4 


99.9 


Cumulative 
Per  cent. 


.7 
5.8 
18.9 
20.7 
39.3 
41.8 
62.5 
99.9 


•TABLE   IV 
PREPARATION   OF    SPECIAL    HIGH    SCHOOL    TEACHERS 


Kind  of  Preparation 


Elementary  School  . 
Part  High  School     .      . 
Standard  High  School    . 
Part  Normal  Course 
Non-standard  Normal 

Course 

Standard  Normal  Course 

Part  College 

College 


Grand  Total 


Manual 
Training 


No.       % 


1  2.9 
3  8.8 
8  23.5 

2  5.9 


20.6 

11.7 

23.5 

2.9 


34       99.8 


Com- 
mercial 


No. 


1 
3 
8 

12 

1 
1 
6 
2 


2.9 

8.8 

23.5 

35.3 

2.9 

2.9 

17.7 

5.9 


34      99.9 


Domestic 
Science 


No.       % 


3 
11 

1 


9.1 

33.3 

3. 


1  3. 

2  6.1 
10  30.3 

5  15.1 


33       999 


Agricul- 
ture 


No.      % 


80 
20 


100 


Totals 


No.      % 


2  1.9 

9  8.5 

27  25.5 
15  14.1 

9  8.5 

7  6.6 

28  26.4 
9  8.5 


106       100 


o 


o 

o 


M 


THE  TEACHERS  65 

than  10  per  cent,  of  the  special  high  school  teachers 
now  in  service  are  well  trained.  Forty  per  cent,  have 
had  a  normal  school  or  a  part  college  course,  but  a  fourth 
have  never  gone  beyond  the  high  school  itself.  To  be 
sure,  these  high  school  graduates  have  had  in  most  cases 
the  special  high  school  course  in  manual  training  or 
domestic  science,  or  the  commercial  branches,  but  such 
instruction  hardly  gives  them  the  broad  outlook  upon 
life  and  industry  which  is  essential  to  efficient  work  in 
their  chosen  fields. 

A  fair  degree  of  uniformity  in  the  teaching  body  can  be 
obtained  only  if  admission  thereto  is  controlled  by  a 
central  agency.  Maryland,  instead  of  a  single  portal,  has 
almost  half  a  dozen:  the  county  examination,  normal 
school  diplomas,  college  certificates,  and  other  evidences 
of  training.  No  one  authority  passes  upon  these  diverse 
credentials.  In  consequence,  there  is  no  common  stand- 
ard and  no  way  of  enforcing  a  common  standard,  if  one 
were  formulated. 

As  has  been  intimated  in  the  preceding  chapter,  the 
teachers'  examinations  conducted  by  county  superin- 
tendents form  the  most  objectionable  feature  of  the  exist- 
ing situation.  We  have  called  attention  to  the  fact  that 
untrained  superintendents  cannot  conduct  judicious  ex- 
aminations. As  a  matter  of  fact,  under  the  existing  law, 
neither  can  highly  trained  county  superintendents.  For 
the  subjects  of  the  examinations  are  regulated  by  stat- 
utes that  make  a  sensible  examination  practically  im- 
possible. 


66  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

These  statutes  go  back  to  the  period  between  1866  and 
1872,  when  the  conception  of  a  free  public  school  system 
was  just  beginning  to  be  formed.  The  pioneers  in  this 
field  were  men  of  vision  who  planned  a  program  of  in- 
struction unrealized  even  at  the  present  time.  Their 
ambitious  ideas  were  embodied  in  the  law  of  1872,  which 
prescribed  that  there  "shall  be  taught  in  every  district 
school,  orthography,  reading,  writing,  English  grammar, 
geography,  arithmetic,  history  of  the  United  States,  good 
behavior,  algebra,  bookkeeping,  natural  philosophy,  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States,  the  Constitution  of  the 
State  of  Maryland,  the  history  of  Maryland,  vocal  music, 
drawing,  physiology,  the  laws  of  health,  and  domestic 
economy."  It  was  also  provided  that,  in  communities 
having  a  considerable  German  population,  the  German 
language  might  also  be  introduced.  Nor  was  this  pre- 
tentious program  distributed  between  elementary  and 
high  schools;  on  the  contrary,  it  was  part  of  the  dream 
that  all  branches  should  be  taught  in  every  district 
school. 

Teachers  were  to  be  selected  on  the  basis  of  their  fit- 
ness to  carry  out  this  ambitious  scheme.  To  be  sure, 
two  grades  of  certificates  were  recognized.  The  second 
or  lower  grade — regarded  as  a  makeshift  then,  though 
to-day,  half  a  century  later,  it  is  still  the  prevailing  cer- 
tificate— called  for  an  examination  in  spelling,  reading, 
writing,  arithmetic,  English  grammar,  geography,  and 
history  only;  the  first-grade  certificate  involved  an  exam- 
ination in  all  the  studies  mentioned  in  the  law,  except 


THE  TEACHERS  67 

physiology,  vocal  music,  drawing,  laws  of  health,  and 
domestic  economy.  There  was  thus  a  close  correspond- 
ence between  the  visionary  course  of  study  meant  for 
every  district  school  and  the  examination  required  for  a 
first-grade  certificate. 

Despite  the  vision,  however,  the  actual  instruction  in 
the  one-room  rural  and  village  schools  was  practically 
limited  to  the  so-called  three  R's,  English  grammar, 
geography,  and  history.  Branches  like  bookkeeping, 
algebra,  and  natural  philosophy  were  attempted  as  a  rule 
only  in  the  academies  and  in  the  high  schools  of  the 
larger  towns,  and  the  number  of  pupils  taking  them  was 
small.  For  example,  as  late  as  1900  Howard  County 
reported  only  134  pupils  in  all  the  schools  of  the  county 
above  the  sixth  grade;  of  these  68  were  in  bookkeeping, 
123  in  algebra,  and  56  in  natural  philosophy.  But  the 
academies  and  high  schools  did  not  confine  themselves 
to  the  studies  prescribed  in  the  law.  Latin  and  higher 
mathematics  including  geometry,  trigonometry,  and  sur- 
veying formed  the  backbone  of  their  instruction;  a  little 
English  literature  and  a  smattering  of  the  more  exact 
sciences  such  as  astronomy  were  also  taught. 

Prospective  teachers  had  therefore  under  the  law  to 
be  trained  to  teach  a  course  of  study  which  as  a  matter  of 
fact  had  no  existence  in  either  elementary  or  high  schools. 
Hence  examination  based  on  the  statutory  requirement 
did  not  test  the  qualifications  of  teachers  to  give  instruc- 
tion in  the  subjects  actually  taught.  Those  who  strove 
to  obtain  the  first-grade  certificate  as  a  basis  of  teaching 


68  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

in  elementary  schools  were  compelled  to  equip  them- 
selves in  algebra,  natural  philosophy,  and  the  like,  but 
not  in  such  elementary  school  branches  as  physiology, 
the  laws  of  health,  vocal  music,  drawing,  and  domestic 
economy.  Those  who  strove  to  obtain  a  first-grade 
certificate  in  order  to  teach  in  the  high  school  were  even 
more  remote  from  their  needs,  for  they  took  no  examina- 
tion in  Latin,  higher  mathematics,  English  literature, 
general  history,  or  in  any  of  the  sciences  other  than  nat- 
ural philosophy.  In  a  word,  the  examination  for  the 
standard  certificate  of  the  day  was  a  poor  basis  for  select- 
ing teachers  for  the  elementary  schools  and  of  little  or  no 
worth  in  the  selection  of  high  school  teachers.  Incredible 
as  it  may  seem,  these  defects,  dating  back  to  the  year 
1872,  persist  to  this  very  day.  Indeed,  despite  the 
differentiation  made  in  recent  years  between  elementary 
schools  and  high  schools,  the  examination  system  of  1872 
lasted  up  to  1904  without  a  single  statutory  change. 

At  that  time,  without  cutting  anything  out,  there  were 
added  to  the  examination  subjects  for  the  second-grade 
certificate  the  history  of  Maryland,  the  State  and  Na- 
tional Constitution,  physiology,  algebra  to  quadratics, 
the  theory  and  practice  of  teaching,  and  the  laws  and 
the  by-laws  of  the  public  schools.  Young  women  who 
teach  in  the  elementary  rural  schools  are  thus  examined 
in  algebra,  which  they  do  not  teach,  but  not  in  drawing 
or  agriculture  which  they  are  expected  to  teach.  Mean- 
while, candidates  for  the  first-grade  certificate  are  tested 
in  bookkeeping,  algebra,  and  natural  philosophy,  subjects 


THE  TEACHERS  69 

long  since  dropped  from  the  elementary  schools,  and  in 
general  history  and  plane  geometry  which  are  distinctly 
high  school  studies,  while  they  go  entirely  unexamined  in 
important  elementary  branches.  Equally  disastrous  is 
the  effect  of  this  arrangement  on  the  high  school.  For  as 
the  first-grade  certificate  qualifies  for  a  high  school  post, 
instruction  may  be  given  in  Latin,  higher  mathematics, 
English  literature,  or  science  by  a  person  holding  a  teach- 
ing license  issued  absolutely  without  reference  to  them. 

No  serious  effort  has  yet  been  made  to  get  rid  of  the 
absurdities  which  we  have  just  pointed  out.  The  state 
has  limited  its  endeavors  to  encouraging  improvement  in 
ways  that,  helpful  though  they  be,  do  not  strike  at  the 
root  of  the  problem.  A  succession  of  laws  beginning  in 
1867  has  aimed  to  encourage  and  develop  the  county 
institute;  in  19 14  counties  were  authorized,  in  lieu  of 
holding  the  annual  institute,  to  require  not  less  than  a 
fourth  of  their  teachers  to  attend  a  summer  school;  and 
in  the  same  year,  the  payment  of  higher  salaries  to  teach- 
ers of  superior  training  or  ability  was  also  authorized. 
Such  provisions  are  wise  enough  in  their  way  for  they 
tend  to  improve  the  existing  teaching  corps.  But  much 
more  radical  measures  must  be  taken. 

At  the  outset  a  clear  division  must  be  made  between 
certificates  valid  in  the  elementary  school  and  those 
valid  in  the  high  school.  On  the  side  of  the  elementary 
school  an  examination  should  be  devised  which  will  test 
the  fitness  not  in  some,  but  in  all,  the  branches  included 
in  the  elementary  course  of  study.     On  the  side  of  the 


7o  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

high  school  there  will  need  to  be  such  a  grouping  of  the 
principal  academic  studies  that  no  teacher  will  be  per- 
mitted to  teach  a  branch  unless  she  has  first  proven  her 
fitness.  In  order  that  uniformity  of  standard  may  be  se- 
cured, these  examinations  should  be  conducted  by  the 
state  department,  acting  through  the  County  Super- 
intendent. From  an  eligible  list  thus  formed,  teachers 
should  be  appointed  by  the  County  Superintendent — no 
longer  as  now  by  the  county  boards  and  the  district 
trustees. 

In  bringing  about  this  reorganization  an  important 
factor  will  be  the  normal  schools  of  the  state,  to  the  con- 
sideration of  which  we  now  turn. 

Maryland  supports  two  establishments  for  the  training 
of  white  elementary  school  teachers — the  Normal  School 
at  Frostburg  and  the  new  Normal  School  at  Towson. 

The  Frostburg  School,  established  in  1897,  remains 
without  any  clear  function  in  the  state  school  system. 
Provision  for  it  has  always  been  grudging.  The  present 
plant  comprises  a  modest  building  capable  of  accommo- 
dating about  175  students  with  additional  quarters  for  a 
small  practice  school.  The  equipment  is  poor  and  alto- 
gether inadequate  for  instruction  in  nature  study,  physics, 
chemistry,  manual  training,  domestic  science,  and  the 
fine  arts.  The  total  amount  provided  annually  by  the 
state  for  all  expenses  from  1902  to  1914  was  $7,000;  in 
1914  the  sum  was  raised  to  $10,000.  Accordingly,  the 
salaries  of  the  instructors  scarcely  exceed  those  in  the 
neighboring  high  schools,  and  are  in  any  case  too  meagre 


THE  TEACHERS  71 

to  procure  a  qualified  staff.  Nevertheless,  the  school  has 
grown  rapidly,  having  in  19 14  an  enrolment  of  102  pre- 
paratory and  61  normal  students,  a  total  of  163,  mostly 
drawn  from  Allegany  County.  Including  the  class  of 
1 9 14,  156  students  have  completed  the  course,  of  whom 
131  are  now  engaged  in  teaching. 

The  institution  destined  to  be  made  the  central  normal 
school  is  the  Baltimore  Normal,  established  in  1865. 
The  building  occupied  from  the  early  70's  until  the  pres- 
ent autumn  was  for  years  one  of  the  best  of  its  kind  in  the 
country,  and  even  at  the  time  of  its  abandonment  was  not 
altogether  unadapted  to  its  purposes.  While  thus  fairly 
well  housed  the  funds  for  its  support  have  never  been 
adequate.  Prior  to  1914  the  regular  annual  appropria- 
tion did  not  exceed  $20,000,  and  it  is  now  only  $50,000. 

For  almost  forty  years  the  Baltimore  Normal  was  the 
only  school  for  the  training  of  teachers  supported  and  con- 
trolled by  the  state.  Its  graduates,  representing  all 
sections  and  numbering  more  than  2,500,  are  to  be  found 
in  important  positions  both  within  and  without  the 
schools.  The  school  has,  however,  operated  on  so  inade- 
quate an  allowance  that  at  best  it  has  accomplished  only 
a  part  of  what  it  might  have  accomplished.  Its  leader- 
ship has  at  times  been  distinctly  inadequate;  not  infre- 
quently, lacking  funds  to  employ  trained  and  experienced 
teachers,  the  school  has  appointed  to  its  staff  its  own  re- 
cent graduates.  Inbreeding  has  thus  gone  on  with  its 
usual  bad  effects. 

Our  interest  is,  however,  with  the  future,  not  with  the 


72  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

past,  of  the  Baltimore  Normal  School.  The  school  has 
just  occupied  its  new  quarters  at  Towson,  with  dormitory 
accommodations  for  two  hundred  students,  classrooms, 
laboratory,  library,  and  gymnasium  facilities  for  six  or 
seven  hundred,  and  ample  quarters  for  an  adequate  prac- 
tice school.  If  the  state  is  to  derive  full  returns  from  the 
enormous  sum  now  invested  in  its  plant  and  equipment,  a 
thoroughgoing  reorganization  is  needed. 

We  make  this  suggestion  in  no  spirit  of  fault-finding 
with  those  who  have  hitherto  had  to  conduct  the  school 
on  a  quite  insufficient  allowance.  It  may  well  be  that 
no  one  could  have  done  better  under  the  circumstances. 
But  the  new  plant  totally  changes  conditions.  Its  facil- 
ities are  perhaps  not  surpassed  anywhere;  and  an  ade- 
quate budget  will  doubtless  be  provided.  Under  these 
circumstances  the  head  of  the  school  ought  to  be  the 
most  competent  that  the  country  affords;  and  the  entire 
country  should  be  searched  in  order  to  find  him.  Poli- 
tics, personal  interest,  and  local  pride  must  be  eliminated, 
for  upon  this  selection  depends  in  great  part  the  progress 
of  the  public  schools  of  the  entire  state.  In  the  same 
way  such  men  and  women  should  be  selected  as  teachers, 
in  charge  of  the  different  departments,  as  will  not  only  be 
able  to  develop  strong  courses  of  instruction  within  the 
school,  but  also  to  exert  an  influence  throughout  the 
state.  For  there  is  need  not  only  of  capable  instructors, 
but  of  organizers  who  can  work  with  the  teachers  in  the 
field,  inspiring  and  directing  them  in  their  daily  work. 

The  activities  of  the  old  school  stopped  with  the  close 


THE  TEACHERS  73 

of  the  school  year  in  June.  The  work  of  a  progressive 
school  that  would  fully  occupy  its  field,  and  especially  a 
normal  school,  is  never  done.  Indeed,  the  summer  sea- 
son offers  a  great  opportunity  to  the  Baltimore  Normal, 
if  it  is  to  rise  to  the  new  and  larger  service  before  it. 
Over  75  per  cent,  of  the  elementary  teachers  outside 
of  the  city  of  Baltimore,  when  judged  most  liberally, 
have  had  less  than  a  standard  professional  preparation; 
to  add  to  the  initial  equipment  of  these  ill-prepared 
teachers  should  become  one  of  the  primary  objects  of  the 
institution.  To  this  end  there  should  be  a  summer 
session,  and  the  work  of  the  summer  session  should  equal 
in  strength  and  attractiveness  that  of  the  regular  school 
year. 

Again,  the  entrance  standards  of  the  old  school  have 
always  been  low.  For  years  young  people  taken  from 
the  highest  grade  of  the  elementary  school  were  gradu- 
ated in  three  years;  only  since  1904  has  the  course  run 
four  years,  divided  equally  between  preparatory  and 
professional  work.  By  resolution  of  the  State  Board  of 
Education  the  admission  requirements  for  19 15  were  fixed 
at  the  completion  of  the  second  year  of  high  school,  but 
no  steps  were  taken  to  readjust  the  old  two-year  prepara- 
tory course. 

While  more  high  school  graduates  entered  in  the  fall  of 
191 5  than  ever  before,  a  great  part  of  the  work  of  the 
school  is  still  confined,  as  it  always  has  been,  to  prepara- 
tory students.  Surely  the  time  is  now  at  hand  when  the 
school  should  cease  to  build  its  professional  work  upon  an 


74  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

abbreviated  high  school  course.  This  does  not  imply 
that  the  present  work  below  the  professional  course  should 
be  summarily  abandoned.  There  are,  and  for  some  time 
there  will  continue  to  be,  sections  without  high  schools 
in  easy  reach  of  ambitious  young  people.  To  accommo- 
date students  thus  located  who  desire  to  become  teachers 
the  high  school  course  at  the  Baltimore  Normal  should  be 
maintained;  but  it  should  be  lengthened  to  full  four  years, 
and  so  strengthened  that  it  will  become  one  of  the  strong- 
est in  the  state,  instead  of  being  a  mere  subterfuge  and 
makeshift. 

It  has  been  urged  that  the  present  is  an  appropriate 
time  to  broaden  the  activities  of  the  Baltimore  Normal 
so  as  to  include  the  preparation  of  secondary  teachers. 
Even  if  the  state  were  not  pledged  to  another  policy,  it 
is  our  opinion  that  this  central  school  should  confine  its 
attention  solely  to  the  training  of  elementary  teachers. 
The  number  of  secondary  teachers  needed  annually  is 
too  small  for  the  state  to  undertake  to  develop,  in  com- 
petition with  colleges  already  in  the  field,  strong  courses 
for  regular  high  school  teachers.  There  are,  however, 
two  kinds  of  high  school  teacher — viz.,  teachers  of 
domestic  science  and  of  manual  training — for  the  train- 
ing of  whom  no  other  schools  in  Maryland  are  at  all 
equipped,  and  with  these  the  Normal  might  wisely  deal. 
The  suggestion  that  it  should  also  train  supervisors  is, 
in  our  judgment,  without  value.  The  number  of  new 
supervisors  annually  needed  is  inconsiderable.  To  pro- 
vide proper  facilities  could  only  be  done  at  excessive  cost. 


THE  TEACHERS  75 

The  state  should  indeed  maintain  a  high  standard  in 
appointing  supervisors,  but  it  should  expect  supervisors  to 
resort  to  special  institutions  for  supplementary  training. 

The  Towson  plant  was  created  on  the  theory  that  the 
training  of  all  the  elementary  teachers  for  the  white 
schools  might  be  there  concentrated.  In  1914  the  total  en- 
rolment of  both  the  Baltimore  and  the  Frostburg  schools 
was  2  24 ;  there  were  101  graduates.  To  supply  all  the  new 
elementary  teachers  needed  in  the  state  an  enrolment 
of  more  than  600  and  yearly  graduates  in  excess  of  300 
are  required,  or  an  increase  in  enrolment  and  graduates  of 
more  than  200  per  cent.  It  is  necessary,  therefore,  to 
attract  students  in  larger  numbers  and  to  hold  them  until 
they  complete  the  course.     But  a  difficulty  arises. 

Two-thirds  of  the  teachers  of  Maryland  work  in  vil- 
lages and  the  open  country;  40  per  cent,  of  them  have 
one-room  schools.  Will  the  graduates  of  this  stately 
normal  school  be  willing  to  teach  in  rural  schools?  Will 
the  practice  school  at  Towson  reproduce  even  approxi- 
mately the  conditions  which  most  of  its  graduates  may 
have  to  meet?  How  can  courses  and  practice  opportuni- 
ties be  adjusted  to  rural  needs?  American  experience  is 
not  wholly  encouraging  in  this  matter.  Central  normal 
schools  do  not  readily  represent  the  rural  point  of  view; 
and  teachers  trained  in  them  prefer  town  and  city  posts. 
For  this  reason  many  states  are  endeavoring  to  train 
teachers  for  the  rural  elementary  schools  in  connection 
with  county  high  schools;  and  the  legislature  of  Mary- 
land passed  in  1914  a  permissive  law  looking  to  this  end. 


76  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

For  the  moment,  however,  it  will  probably  be  wisest 
to  take  no  steps  in  this  direction  until  the  Towson  school 
has  had  a  fair  chance  to  grapple  with  the  problem.1 

There  are  now  672  colored  teachers  in  the  schools  out- 
side of  the  city  of  Baltimore.  To  encourage  their  fur- 
ther preparation — less  than  40  per  cent,  of  whom  can  be 
credited  with  anything  like  a  satisfactory  training — and 
toprepare  approximately  7  5  new  colored  teachers  required 
annually,  the  state  maintains  a  single  institution,  the 
Maryland  Normal  and  Industrial  School  at  Bowie, 
opened  under  the  auspices  of  the  State  Board  of  Educa- 
tion, September,  191 1. 

The  equipment  comprises  a  farm  of  187  acres,  an  ordi- 
nary eight-room  school  building,  the  attic  story  of  which 
serves  for  a  girls'  dormitory,  the  first  and  second  floors 
for  classrooms  and  the  principal's  office,  and  the  base- 
ment for  kitchen  and  dining-room.  A  remodelled  barn 
answers  for  a  dormitory  for  boys,  and  there  is  also  an  old 
farmhouse  used  principally  for  storage.  The  present 
annual  appropriation  for  maintenance  is  $7,000,  and 
there  are  accommodations  for  about  70  students. 

The  course  for  teachers  is  three  years  in  length,  with  an 
entrance  requirement  equivalent  to  the  sixth  grade  of  the 
public  school.  So  many  students,  however,  offered  them- 
selves, whose  preparation  fell  below  this  standard,  that  a 
two-year   preparatory  course  had  to  be  added.     The 

^his  delay  will  be  of  advantage  for  another  reason.  The  General 
Education  Board  is  just  beginning  a  thorough  study  of  the  training  of 
rural  teachers  in  Minnesota  and  other  states.  The  results  will  probably 
be  available  within  a  year. 


THE  TEACHERS  77 

enrolment  in  the  normal  course  in  1913-1914  was  43,  with 
one  special  student,  and  in  the  preparatory  department, 
28,  making  a  total  of  72 — an  enrolment  which  taxes  the 
accommodations  to  the  limit. 

The  management  of  the  school  is  excellent.  The 
principal  and  his  assistant  are  at  once  competent  and 
"rural-minded."  An  abandoned  farm  was  part  of  the 
school  property.  As  school  and  students  were  both 
needy,  principal  and  students  set  to  work  to  make  the 
farm  supply  what  they  lacked.  The  result  has  been 
gratifying  from  every  point  of  view.  Supplies  have  been 
raised,  because  there  was  no  money  with  which  to  buy 
them;  in  the  process  agriculture  has  been  efficiently 
taught,  and  rural  school  teachers  of  the  right  type  have 
been  trained.  Up  to  date,  however,  the  graduates  num- 
ber only  25,  and  not  all  of  these  have  become  teachers. 

The  Maryland  Normal  and  Industrial  School  at  Bowie 
is,  to  be  sure,  not  the  only  source  of  colored  teachers: 
Hampton,  Tuskegee,  Cheney  Normal  School,  Dover 
College,  and  others  contribute;  some  are  also  obtained 
from  the  Washington  High  School,  and  from  the  Balti- 
more High  School  and  Morgan  College.  Nevertheless, 
half  of  the  colored  teachers  of  the  state  have  no  certifi- 
cates other  than  "postal  card  certificates" — that  is,  they 
are  permitted  to  teach  without  having  passed  any  exam- 
ination at  all,  the  county  superintendents  selecting  those 
most  likely  to  succeed,  irrespective  of  academic  and  pro- 
fessional credentials. 

The  only  other  institution  within  the  state,  besides  the 


78  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

Maryland  Normal  and  Industrial  School  and  the  Balti- 
more High  School,  that  attempts  to  prepare  elementary- 
colored  teachers,  is  the  Princess  Anne  Academy,  under 
the  management  of  the  Morgan  College  Corporation. 
This  school  has  a  good-sized  farm  and  rather  ample  quar- 
ters and  equipment.  While  it  is  essentially  a  prepara- 
tory school  for  Morgan  College,  yet  the  employment  of 
Federal  funds  has  made  agriculture  and  agricultural 
pursuits  prominent  and  given  to  the  school  an  industrial 
atmosphere.  Special  attention  has  lately  been  given  to 
the  preparation  of  teachers.  Besides  regular  courses 
during  the  year,  a  summer  school  with  an  enrolment  of 
about  40  was  conducted  in  191 5.  The  school  is  located 
near  the  colored  population  centre  of  the  Eastern  Shore, 
readily  accessible,  and  is  in  position  to  exert  a  good  influ- 
ence upon  the  public  schools  of  that  section. 

This  brief  statement  will  show  that  Maryland's  present 
facilities  for  training  negro  teachers  are  altogether  inade- 
quate, even  though  we  reckon,  as  an  additional  factor, 
the  industrial  schools  supported  in  16  counties  at  an 
annual  cost  to  the  state  of  $22,500.  There  is,  therefore, 
every  reason  why  the  school  at  Bowie  should  be  developed 
and  made  the  centre  for  the  training  of  colored  teachers 
for  at  least  the  Western  Shore,  if  not  for  the  entire  state. 
To  do  this  its  facilities  will  need  to  be  largely  increased 
and  the  teaching  staff  developed,  so  that  it  will  be  in 
position  to  give  instruction  to  larger  numbers  of  prospec- 
tive teachers  during  the  year  and  to  offer  helpful  work 
during  the  summer  to  those  now  in  service. 


THE  TEACHERS  79 

But  the  development  of  the  school  at  Bowie  alone  will 
not  be  sufficient.  Maryland  would  do  well  to  follow  the 
example  of  Virginia  and  other  Southern  States  in  the 
establishment  of  County  Training  Schools — schools 
which,  while  giving  appropriate  instruction  of  a  secondary 
grade,  will  also  provide  for  a  certain  amount  of  teacher 
training.  In  this  way  a  gradually  improved  teaching 
force,  particularly  for  the  rural  schools,  can  be  built  up. 

Our  position  regarding  the  teachers  of  Maryland  may 
then  be  briefly  summarized.  The  profession  is  without 
standards,  without  even  the  possibility  of  standards. 
Some  form  of  central  control  must  be  instituted;  teachers 
must  be  differentiated  on  the  basis  of  their  particular 
functions;  and  appointments  must  be  made  by  the 
County  Superintendent,  who,  under  the  new  order,  will 
necessarily  be  a  trained  officer.  Meanwhile,  the  reorgan- 
ized normal  schools  of  the  state,  cooperating  with  the  re- 
organized county  school  organization,  should  prove  an 
important  influence  in  improving  teachers  now  in  service. 


VII.  ENROLMENT  AND  ATTENDANCE 

IN  THE  effort  to  ascertain  how  well  Maryland  edu- 
cates its  children  and  what  measures  it  must  take 
to  improve  educational  facilities,  we  have  thus  far 
discussed  the  administrative  organization,  state  and 
county,  and  the  character  and  qualifications  of  the  super- 
vising and  teaching  bodies.  We  have  criticised  the 
county  boards  as  politically  constituted,  the  county 
superintendents  as  lacking  in  technical  training  and 
stability  of  tenure,  the  teaching  body  as  ill-prepared  and 
heterogeneous.  Exceptions  have  indeed  been  gladly 
noted.  A  few  county  boards  are  non-political;  a  few 
county  superintendents  are  competent  and  secure;  some 
teachers — indeed,  not  a  few — are  well-trained,  intelligent, 
and  progressive.  Nevertheless,  these  exceptions,  impor- 
tant as  they  are,  do  not  really  leaven  the  mass. 

Whether  or  not  the  organization  which  we  have  thus  de- 
scribed does  the  best  that  it  is  capable  of  doing  depends  on 
two  factors  to  the  consideration  of  which  we  now  turn,  viz. : 
(i)  the  regularity  with  which  children  attend  school,  and 
(2)  the  course  of  instruction  through  which  they  are  put. 
To  the  former  topic  the  present  chapter  will  be  devoted. 

The  legal  school  age  in  Maryland  is  from  five  to  twenty 
years  of  age.     But  children  will  neither  start  to  school 

80 


ENROLMENT  AND  ATTENDANCE 


81 


at  five  nor  remain  until  they  are  twenty.  It  would  there- 
fore be  absurd  to  criticise  enrolment  and  attendance  on 
the  basis  of  the  statutory  requirement.  It  is  however  fair 
to  expect  children  to  begin  school  at  six;  and  now  that  high 
schools  are  developing,  it  is  important  to  ascertain  how 
many  pupils  remain  up  to,  say,  eighteen.  Accordingly, 
children  from  six  to  eighteen  years  of  age  are  regarded  in 
this  chapter  as  constituting  the  school  population. 

The  number  of  children  in  Maryland  between  6  and  18 
has  increased  decidedly  since  1880.  There  were  276,229 
children  of  school  age  in  Maryland  in  1880;  there  were 
339,467  in  1914.  Simultaneously,  as  might  be  expected, 
the  number  of  children  enrolled  in  schools  has  also  in- 
creased. What  is  more,  the  increase  in  school  enrolment 
has  been  larger  than  the  increase  in  school  population. 
Conditions  have  therefore  improved.     (Fig.  4.)     In  1880 


FIG.   4 


SCHOOL  POPULATION ((,-18)6-  SCHOOL  EM&LLMENT 


4- 

339, 

467... 

USANPS 
01 

276,229 

245 

0 

.--' ' 

0, 

X 

POPULATION 

ENROLLMENT 

1880 


.258 


1390 


1900 


1910      1914- 


82 


PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 


only  59  per  cent,  of  the  white  and  colored  children  be- 
tween 6  and  18  were  in  school,  whereas  in  19 14,  73  per 
cent,  were  registered.  In  a  word,  in  1880,  41  children 
out  of  each  100  that  should  have  been  in  school  were 
not  there,  while  in  1914  only  27  out  of  each  100  were 
out  altogether.     (Fig.  5.)     Children  are,  of  course,  and 


FIG.   S 


90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
£0 
10 


PERCENT  OF  TOTAL  SCHOOL  POPULATION f 6-13)  ENROLLEP 


5a  3% 

12.5"\* 


18S0 


1890 


i900 


i910      1914 


have  always  been,  enrolled  in  other  than  public  schools. 
We  have  no  means  of  knowing  how  many  attended  pri- 
vate and  parochial  schools  in  1880,  nor  do  we  know  how 
many  attend  private  and  parochial  schools  to-day.  There 
can  be  no  doubt,  however,  that  a  larger  percentage  of  the 
school  population  attended  public  schools  in  19 14  than 
attended  in  1880.  Public  school  enrolment  is,  however, 
even  now  less  than  three-fourths  of  the  school  popula- 
tion. 


o 
o 


o 

o 

— 

o 
is 


>> 


o 
o 

On 


ENROLMENT  AND  ATTENDANCE 


83 


Up  to  1900  the  situation  is  partly  explained  by  the 
non-enrolment  of  large  numbers  of  colored  children. 
(Fig.  6.)     Since  1900,  however,  the  difference  between 


FIG.  6 


100^ 

90 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 


PERCENT  OF  WHITE  AN?  COLOREP  CHO.PREN  ((,-i8)ENROLLEP 


62a%  WHITE 

4J$.c^?--- 

-,--  "~~* 

7Z.(,% 
69 5  7. 


1S80 


1890 


1900 


1310     1914 


the  enrolment  of  colored  children  and  the  enrolment  of 
white  children  has  become  practically  negligible.  In 
that  year  there  were  enrolled  68  per  cent,  of  the  white 
as  against  66  per  cent,  of  the  colored  children,  and  2  to  3 
per  cent,  continues  to  measure  the  difference. 

Were  there  an  up-to-date  and  complete  school  census 
giving  the  number  of  children  of  each  age  and  the  number 
at  school,  it  would  be  possible  to  determine  accurately 
the  number  of  children  of  each  age  who  are  not  enrolled. 
Such  data  are  not  available,  for  Maryland  does  not  take 
a  state  school  census.  Hence,  there  is  no  telling  how 
enrolment  varies  with  age.     The  Federal  Census,  how- 


84  PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

ever,  throws  some  light  on  the  question.  On  the  basis 
of  its  figures  for  1910  it  appears  that,  of  children  between 
6  and  14  years  of  age,  17  white  children  out  of  each  100, 
and  29  colored  children  out  of  each  100  are  not  enrolled. 
(Fig.  7.)     Of  children  between  15  and  18 — i.  e.,  the  high 

FIG.    7 
PERCENT  OF  CHILDREN  OF  ELEMENTAL  SCHOOL  AC-z(t-U)  IN  SCHOOL 


WHITE 

COLOSfP 

/\,imoo/\ 

/               IN  SCHOOL                \ 

Vjr 

{,M 

school  age — only  44  per  cent,  of  the  white  and  61  per  cent, 
of  the  colored  children  are  in  school  (Fig.  8) — not,  of 
course,  in  the  high  school;  for  40  per  cent,  of  the  white  chil- 
dren in  school  between  15  and  18  years  old  are  floundering 
about  between  the  second  and  the  seventh  grades  of  the 
elementary  school,1  and  the  same  is  true  of  all  the 
colored  pupils.     These  figures  may  not  be  absolutely 

^his  statement  is  made  upon  the  basis  of  the  per  cent,  of  children 
between  15  and  18  in  these  grades  in  the  cities.     See  Table  VI. 


ENROLMENT  AND  ATTENDANCE     85 

correct,  but  they  serve  to  explain  why  in  the  Federal 
Census  of  19 10  Maryland  ranks  twenty- third  in  point 
of  illiteracy. 

FIG.  8 
PERCENT  OF  CHILDREN  07  HIGH  SCHOOL  AGE  ( 15- Id)  XN  SCHOOL 


WHITE  COLORED 


An  efficient  system  of  public  schools  not  only  enrolls 
children,  but  holds  at  least  those  who  are  physically  and 
mentally  normal  until  they  have  finished  the  elementary, 
if  not  the  high  school,  course.  The  school  records  of 
Maryland  are  so  incomplete  that  it  is  impossible  to  de- 
termine with  accuracy  the  number  of  grades  finished  by 
children  before  they  drop  out  of  school.  But  enough  is 
known  to  show  that  the  situation  is  deplorably  bad. 
Under  normal  conditions  children  start  to  school  in  their 
seventh  year  (i.  e.,  when  they  are  six  years  old) ;  therefore, 
if  the  system  is  efficient — if,  that  is,  they  start  to  school 
at  six  and  remain  consecutively,  there  ought  to  be  just 


86 


PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 


about  as  many  children  in  the  second  class  or  grade  as  there 
were  in  the  first.  Now  in  cities  having  a  population  of 
2,500  or  more,  exclusive  of  Baltimore,  there  were  enrolled 
in  the  winter  term  last  year  1,916  children  from  eight 
to  nine  years  of  age,  and  only  1,590  children  from  six  to 
seven  years  of  age.1  In  other  words,  about  16  per 
cent,  of  the  children  started  from  one  to  two  years  too 
late.  In  consequence,  many  of  the  late  beginners  will 
drop  out  of  school  without  completing  the  elementary 
curriculum;  for  a  late  start  reduces  the  number  of  years 
spent  in  school  and,  as  a  rule,  reduces  the  number  of 
grades  finished.  Efforts  must  therefore  be  made  to  get 
children  into  school  more  promptly. 

Once  started,  the  schools,  even  though  there  is  no 
adequate  compulsory  attendance  law,  hold  the  children 
fairly  well  until  they  pass  the  age  of  thirteen.  The  orig- 
inal enrolment  of  1,590  rises  three  years  later  to  1,930, 
gradually  declining  until   there  are   1,598   children  in 

^ABLE  V 


ACEJ  AND  GRADE  J  OF  CHILDREN  fN 

THE  CITIES 

AGES 

"1 

0 

3 

0 

P.t- 

3 

3 
t- 

0 
3 

0 
I* 

0 

3  — 
O 

0 

D-rJ 

3    T« 

0 

h 

O 

0 

1" 

0 

h 

0 

it 

Nil 

0 

D-tO 
3~ 

0 
35 

2 

0° 

Total 

Grddts 

I 

4 

i57^ 

1245 

683 

308 

133 

43 

lfe 

5 

5 

J 

402  2 

II 

11 

354 

845 

671 

346 

166 

89 

37 

19 

3 

2541 

III 

33 

351 

<*" 

528 

336 

186 

98 

44 

10 

1 

2212 

IV 

36 

?'r<i 

541 

4TG 

344 

?19 

86 

34 

7 

2039 

V 

1 

30 

24  ^ 

44>3 

474 

3  53 

184 

65 

23 

1 

1826 

VI 

48 

164 

37? 

361 

260 

112 

49 

9 

1382 

VII 

6 

34 

17? 

338 

300 

175 

58 

13 

3 

1099 

VIII 

2 

48 

1M 

?76 

232 

124 

41 

6 

3 

896 

Ix 

I 

b 

34 

J59 

209 

170 

85 

22 

3 

669 

X 

2 

38 

J05 

175 

119 

59 

18 

4 

520 

XI 

1 

7 

22 

84 

1I& 

112 

33 

19 

385 

Xll 

1 

9 

?3 

22 

4 

§9 

Total 
Aqts 

5 

1590 

1G52 

1916 

1930 

1848 

1685 

1714 

1596 

1358 

968 

TOO 

408 

224 

61 

14 

17650 

ENROLMENT  AND  ATTENDANCE 


87 


attendance  in  their  fourteenth  year.  But  these  figures 
do  not  indicate  orderly  progress  through  the  elementary 
grades.  If  children  started  to  school  when  six  years 
of  age,  fourteen-year-old  children  would  normally  be 
found  in  the  eighth  grade.  If  they  start  later  than  six, 
they  will  as  a  rule  be  correspondingly  retarded.  Now  in 
the  cities  under  consideration,  fourteen-year-old  children 
(Table  VI),  instead  of  being  concentrated  in  the  eighth 
grade,  are  scattered  from  the  first  to  the  eleventh  grades: 
five  were  still  in  the  first  grade;  19  had  finished  the  first 
and  reached  the  second;  300  had  reached  grade  seven, 
and  276,  grade  eight.  About  two-thirds  of  the  children 
under  fourteen  years  of  age — to  be  precise,  898  out  of 
1,358 — were  from  one  to  seven  grades  in  arrears;  44  per 
cent,  had  either  not  reached  or  not  finished  more  than 
grade  V;  only  13  per  cent,  were  normal  or  ahead  of  normal.1 


1  TABLE  VI 
GRADES   COMPLETED   BY  CHILDREN  14  TO  IS  YEARS  OE  AGE 


GRADES 

COMPLETED   AND 

GRADES    NOW'  IN 

x 

V 
<9 

c 

1 

c 

-o 

c 

c 

■0 

> 

c 

-c! 

a 

> 

> 
c 

§ 
> 

5 

c 

1 

c 

§ 
5 

c 

-a 

c 

5 

X 

.S 

c 

c 

C 

V 

i 

V 

"E. 
E 

-Sf 

CL. 

g 

V 

"3. 
E 

01 

"5 
£ 

9 

0) 

g 

Cu 

g 

"5 

13 
it 

i 

<n 

d 

o 

KJ 

o 

o 

6 

3 

6 

3 

u 

Total 

No  of 

Chil- 

dren 

3 

19 

44 

86 

184 

260 

300 

276 

139 

38 

7 

1358 

ftjCSNT 

.4 

1.4 

3? 

6.3 

13.5 

19.1 

22.1 

20.3 

10.2 

2.8 

.5 

99.8 

88 


PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 


On  this  showing,  probably  50  per  cent,  of  the  white 
children  of  the  state,  not  to  mention  the  colored  chil- 
dren, are  taking  up  the  duties  of  life  with  no  more  than 
a  fourth  or  a  fifth  grade  education.  Very  few,  indeed, 
go  much  further.  For,  of  the  original  enrolment  we 
are  now  considering,  the  figures  show  that  while  17 
per  cent,  will  leave  school  before  they  are  fourteen,  50 
per  cent,  will  leave  before  reaching  fifteen,  and  80  per 
cent,  before  reaching  eighteen.  That  is,  not  more  than 
one  in  five  stays  long  enough  to  finish  the  high  school, 
and  not  to  exceed  three  out  of  ten,  even  if  progress  were 
regular,  remain  long  enough  to  complete  the  elementary 
school. 

This  estimate  can  be  confirmed  from  another  direction.1 
Out  of  the  17,650  children  in  the  schools  of  the  cities  in 
the  winter  term  of  1915  (Table  VII),  only  374,  or  2  per 
cent.,  were  ahead  of  their  grade  for  their  age,  as  compared 


1  table  vn 

CHILDREN  UNDER  AGE, NORMAL  ACE  AND  OYER  AGE 


Number  in  Each  Grade 

Total 

in 

each 

Grade 

Percent  in   Each  Grade. 

Grade  3 

Under  Aqe. 

Normal  Aqe 

Over  Aqe 

Under  Aqe 

Normal  Aqe 

Over  Aqe 

I 

4 

1579 

2439 

4022 

.1 

39.3 

60.6 

II 

11 

354 

2176 

2541 

.4 

13.9 

85.7 

111 

33 

551 

1828 

2212 

1.5 

15.8 

BZ.l 

IV 

36 

296 

1707 

2039 

1.8 

14.5 

83.7 

V 

31 

246 

1549 

1826 

1.7 

13.5 

84.8 

VT 

48 

164 

1170 

1582 

3.5 

11.8 

84.7 

VII 

40 

172 

867 

1099 

3.6 

15.7 

80.7 

vm 

50 

164 

OB  2 

896 

5.6 

18.3 

76.1 

IX 

41 

133 

489 

669 

6.1 

20.8 

73.1 

X 

40 

105 

375 

5?0 

7.7 

20.2 

72.1 

XI 

30 

S4 

271 

385 

7.8 

21.9 

70.3 

XI  t 

10 

23 

26 

59 

17. 

39. 

44. 

Total 

374 

3677 

13599 

17650 

2.2 

20.8 

77. 

p 


Modern  Elementary  School 


Recess  in  up-to-date  urban  school 


ENROLMENT  AND  ATTENDANCE      89 

to  13,599,  or  77  Per  cent.,  who  were  behind  their  grade.1 
These  figures  are,  of  course,  not  absolutely  accurate;  but 
the  possible  error2  in  them  would  not  greatly  modify  our 

^able  VII  is  based  on  Table  V.  In  Table  V  the  number  to  the  left 
of  the  block  represents  the  children  in  the  grade  under  age,  the  number  in 
the  block  those  of  normal  age,  and  the  number  to  the  right  of  the  block 
those  over-age.  Over-age  in  this  case  is  judged  from  the  point  of  view 
of  entering  the  grade,  6  up  to  7  being  taken  as  the  normal  age  for  begin- 
ning the  first  grade,  7  up  to  8  for  the  second  grade,  and  so  on.  On  this 
basis  a  child  should  enter  the  eighth  grade  between  13  and  up  to  14  and 
complete  an  eighth-grade  course  by  15. 

The  ages  of  the  children  are  those  of  their  last  birthday,  and  not,  as 
they  should  be,  when  over-age  is  judged  from  entering  the  grade  in  a 
system  having  annual  promotion,  as  of  the  beginning  of  the  official  school 
year.  What  difference  in  the  amount  of  over-age  reported,  this  differ- 
ence in  the  time  of  taking  the  ages  of  the  children  makes,  it  is  impossible 
to  say,  but  in  all  probability  it  is  very  small.  Again,  the  ages  of  the 
children  are  those  recorded  in  the  school  records  by  the  teachers  as  given 
by  the  children  themselves.  No  documentary  evidence  of  age  is  re- 
quired, nor  is  there  any  great  effort  made  on  the  part  of  the  teachers 
to  verify  the  age  given. 

Finally,  there  is  one  point  at  issue  which  makes,  according  as  it  is 
settled,  a  difference  of  30  per  cent,  in  the  amount  of  over-age  reported. 
There  are  those  who  claim  that  the  elementary  school  course  in  Mary- 
land is  an  eight-year  course,  the  additional  grade  being  accounted  for  by 
the  first  grade's  covering  the  work  ordinarily  done  in  the  first  and  second 
years.  There  is  nothing  in  the  state  course  of  study  to  justify  this  posi- 
tion. Nor  is  there  anything  in  the  first-grade  enrolment  of  the  fourteen 
cities  from  which  the  data  were  collected,  except  at  Annapolis,  Bruns- 
wick, Cristfield,  Hagerstown,  and  Cumberland.  But  a  study  of  the 
work  of  the  first  grade  in  at  least  three  of  these  places  reveals  on  the  one 
hand  rather  more  advanced  instruction  in  arithmetic  than  is  ordinarily 
done  in  the  first  grade,  but  shows  on  the  other  that  reading  is  on  the 
whole  under  grade.  Hence  even  in  the  cities  having  an  unusual  large 
first-grade  enrolment,  there  is  no  ground  for  holding  that  the  first  grade 
represents  two  years  of  school  work. 

^his  error  may  arise  from  two  factors:  (1)  Children  may  blunder 
slightly  in  stating  their  age;  (2)  there  is  some  confusion,  due  to  the  fact 
that,  as  the  course  of  study  is  planned  for  seven  years,  it  is  a  question 
whether  the  first  grade  does  not  represent  two  years'  work.  However, 
even  were  it  assumed  that  the  first  grade  combines  two  years'  work,  47 
per  cent,  of  the  children,  above  considered,  would  be  over-age — a  condi- 
tion scarcely  paralleled  in  any  American  city  in  which  the  problem  of 
over-age  has  been  investigated. 


9° 


PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 


verdict.     The  conditions  which  they  reveal  are,  to  say 
the  least,  very  bad. 

Over-age — i.  e.,  being  older  than  a  normal  child  in  a 
given  class1  should  be — is  more  serious  in  the  upper  than 
in  the  lower  grades.  For  a  young  child  who  has  fallen 
behind  may  by  working  hard  catch  up  with  his  class. 
If,  however,  he  is  in  an  upper  grade,  the  chances  are  that, 
should  he  fall  behind,  he  will  drop  out  of  school,  instead 
of  retrieving  the  lost  ground.  In  Maryland  over-age 
runs  straight  through  the  schools.  Enormous  numbers  of 
children  of  all  grades  are  behind  where  they  ought  to  be. 
(Fig.  9.)  Eighty-five  children  out  of  every  hundred  are 
over-age  in  the  second  grade;  and  81  out  of  one  hundred 

FIG.  9 

PERCENT  OT  CHILDREN  INEACH  GRADE  OVTg.  AG£ 
GRADES  I         I        IIIIIIIIIH   TOTAL^ 


irrhe  "normal"  child  in  this  sense  is  the  child  who  is  in  Grade  I  when 
he  is  six  years  old  and  thereafter  advances  at  the  rate  of  one  grade  every 
year. 


ENROLMENT  AND  ATTENDANCE 


9i 


in  the  seventh  grade.  Conditions  are  practically  as  bad 
in  the  high  school,  where  76  per  cent,  are  behind  in  the 
first  year,  and  70  per  cent,  in  the  fourth  year  of  the 
course.1 

As  has  been  already  pointed  out,  over-age  almost  in- 
evitably results  in  abbreviating  the  child's  stay  in  school. 
This  is  certainly  the  case  when  children  are  retarded  more 
than  a  year  or  two.  (Fig.  10.)  For  children  who  ought 
to  finish  their  elementary  schooling  at  fourteen  will  not 
remain  till  they  are  sixteen  or  seventeen  for  that  purpose. 
Now  the  3,943  children2  who  are  between  one  and  two 
years  behind  their  grade  would,  if  they  remain  in  school 
and  advance  regularly,  be  between  16  and  17  when  they 
complete  the  elementary  course.  Similarly,  the  1,058 
who  are  between  three  and  four  years  behind  their  proper 
grade  would  be  between  18  and  19  on  completing  the 
elementary  course  of  study.     Of  course  children  do  not 


^ee  Table  VII  on  page  88. 


^ABLE  VIII 


THE  NUMBER  OF  YEAR- 

PUPILS    AR£  OVER   ACt 

Less  than 

I  year  and 

2  year  J  and 

3years  and 

4  Ljears  and 

Total 

Grade 

one  4eor 

less  than  2 

less  than  3 

less  than  4 

more 

Over-Age 

I 

1245 

683 

308 

153 

70 

2439 

II 

845 

671 

346 

166 

148 

2176 

III 

626 

528 

336 

186 

153 

1828 

IV 

541 

476 

344 

219 

127 

1707 

V 

463 

474 

339 

184 

89 

1549 

VI 

379 

361 

260 

112 

58 

1170 

Vil 

338 

300 

175 

58 

16 

887 

ToUl 

4436. 

3493 

2108 

1058 

641 

11756 

VIII 

276 

232 

124 

41 

9 

682 

IX 

209 

170 

85 

22 

3 

439 

X 

175 

119 

59 

18 

4 

375 

XI 

116 

HE 

33 

8 

1 

271 

XII 

22 

4 

_ 

_ 

- 

26 

Grari 

Toial 

796 

637 

301 

89 

17 

1843 

IVll 

5a>* 

4150 

2409 

1147 

678 

13399 

92 


PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 


remain  in  the  lower  school  to  any  such  ages.  If  they  did, 
there  would  now  be  about  4,000  children  16  years  of  age 
or  older  in  the  elementary  schools  of  the  Maryland  towns 
we  have  been  considering;  there  are,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
only  165.1     It  is  thus  evident  that  orobably  98  per  cent. 


FIG.    IO 


PERCENT  OF  OVERAGE  PUPIL5 
BEHIND  THEIR  GRADES 


LESS   THAN  1  YR. 


1&2YR3 


ELEMENTAFy 
HIGH  SCHOOL 

COMBINED 


i(/3YK.%.    3&4Y&  4KKS.UP 


§^EEE&i 


WWWWWWWWWM 


Ai 


PERCENT  0  10         20  30        4-0  50  (,0        JO  SO  90  iOO 


of  the  children  now  behind  their  grade  will  drop  out  be- 
fore completing  the  course;  in  all  probability  they  will 
lose  just  about  as  many  grades  as  they  are  now  in  arrears. 
Our  estimate,  then,  that  not  to  exceed  50  per  cent,  of  the 
white  children  enrolled  in  the  schools  are  getting  more 
than  a  fifth-grade  education  is  shown  to  be  well  within  the 
facts. 

Several  factors  combine  to  account  for  the  extent  of 
over-age  in  the  Maryland  schools.  Late  entrance  is  one; 
irregular  attendance,  another.     Children  once  enrolled 


^ee  Table  V,  page  86. 


ENROLMENT  AND  ATTENDANCE     93 

cannot  be  promoted  regularly  unless  they  attend  regu- 
larly. It  has  already  been  pointed  out  that  the  enrol- 
ment falls  short  of  the  school  population.  Attention 
must  now  be  directed  to  the  fact  that,  of  the  children  who 
are  enrolled — children,  that  is,  who  propose  to  attend 
school,  only  about  half  attended  on  the  average  in  1880; 
since  then  attendance  has  steadily  improved  until  in 
1914  the  average  daily  attendance,  in  so  far  as  the  enrol- 
ment is  concerned,  reached  65.3  per  cent.    (Fig.   11.) 


FIG.    IT 


PER  CENT  OF  ENROLMENT  IN  AVERAGE  DAILY  ATTENDANCE 
1880  1890  1900  1910  1914 

I       52.8-fo      \/     55.5f.  \    /     fc0.  +  7°\   (       Ml8/.  \[       C.5.57.    \ 


This  is,  to  be  sure,  a  great  improvement  from  the  stand- 
point of  1880;  but  it  is  still  poor;  for  it  means  that  of  every 
one  hundred  children  enrolled,  34  are  now  absent  daily. 
The  plant  thus  seems  to  be  running  at  only  two-thirds 
capacity.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  it  is  far  from  doing  even 
this!  For  attendance  should  be  calculated  on  the  basis 
of  school  population,  not  of  school  enrolment — on  the 
basis,  that  is,  of  the  children  who  ought  to  be  going  to 
school  rather  than  on  the  basis  of  those  who  are  really 


94 


PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 


going.  Thus  considered,  the  average  daily  attendance 
was  31  per  cent,  in  1880 — less,  that  is,  than  one-third  of 
what  it  should  have  been;  and  it  was  47.1  per  cent,  in 
1 9 14 — less  than  one-half  of  what  it  should  have  been. 
The  plant  is  working,  therefore,  not  two- thirds  capacity — 
assuming  that  there  are  accommodations  for  all  children 
between  6  and  18 — but  less  than  one-half  capacity. 
(Fig.  12.)     Hence  the  schools  are  not  doing  half  their  job, 


FIG.    12 


PERCENT  OF    SCHOOL    POPULATION  ((.-IB) 
IN  AVERAGE  DAILY  ATTENDANCE 


1880 


1890 


1900 


1910 


1914- 


even  when  quantity  alone  is  considered. 

In  these  statements  no  distinction  is  made  between 
white  and  colored  children.  One  might  suppose  that  a 
high  average  attendance  among  white  children  is  brought 
down  by  a  low  average  attendance  on  the  part  of  colored 
children.  This  is,  however,  not  the  case.  Colored  chil- 
dren do  indeed  attend  school  less  regularly  than  white, 
but  the  difference  is  not  sufficient  to  account  for  the  bad 
showing.  In  1914  the  attendance  of  colored  children 
averaged  59  per  cent,  against  67  per  cent,  for  whites:  that 


ENROLMENT  AND  ATTENDANCE 


95 


is,  33  white  children  out  of  every  hundred  were  missing 
as  against  41  colored.     (Fig.  13.) 


80 

40 
20 


FIG.   13 

PERCENT  OF  WHITE  &  COLORED  SCHOOL  ENROLL- 
MENT IN  AVERAGE  DAILY  ATTENDANCE 


"WHITE 

^ 

?5*            

m  ~~^~~' 

(,7% 
58.5 


1880 


1890 


1900 


1910      1914 


Conditions  do,  however,  vary  greatly  in  the  various 
counties.  Whether  children  attend  school  regularly  or  not 
depends  on  several  factors — on  the  attitude  of  parents, 
on  the  merits  of  the  schools,  on  the  condition  of  roads, 
etc.  Obviously,  sections  differ  in  these  respects.  (Fig. 
14.)  Baltimore  County,  with  a  relatively  superior  school 
system  and  good  physical  conditions,  leads  the  white 
schools  of  the  state  with  an  average  daily  attendance 
of  73  per  cent.;  St.  Mary's  brings  up  the  rear  with  55  per 
cent.  Even  were  the  white  schools  of  these  two  counties 
of  equal  efficiency,  Baltimore  County  gives  its  children 
a  better  education  with  only  27  out  of  each  one  hundred 


96 


PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 


absent  daily  than  St.  Mary's  gives  with  45  absent  daily. 
Similar  differences  are  to  be  observed  in  the  attendance 


100J 
90 

80 

70 

60 
50 
40 

30 
20 

to 

0 


FIG.   14 

Per  cent  of  Enrolment  in  Average  Daily  Attendance  by  Counties 


WHITE 


COLORED 


2 
^ 


c 

S  a 

S3  C 

3  < 


O 

E 


c 


§  >  g  § 

Ctf         CT3         C3         C$ 

«  u  u  u 


a 


.*-■      4^ 


O       cfl 
rt     O 

K  S 


E 

o 

if 
c 
o 


4) 

c 
c 

< 

c 
<u 


g 


o 
.a 


W2£3</$c2h£££ 


u 


o 
B 

•4-t 

"(3 


of  colored  children.  For  example,  the  average  number  of 
colored  children  in  attendance  in  19 14  in  Worcester 
County  was  40  per  cent,  of  the  enrolment,  whereas  55 
per  cent,  attended  in  Wicomico. 

The  tabulated  records  of  the  county  superintendents 
are  so  lacking  in  details  that  a  more  intensive  study  of 
attendance  cannot  be  made.     There  is  no  way  of  telling 


ENROLMENT  AND  ATTENDANCE     97 

from  the  reports  whether  children  attend  city  schools 
more  regularly  or  less  regularly  than  rural  schools; 
whether  they  attend  the  one-room  school  more  regularly 
or  less  regularly  than  the  two-  or  three-room  school.  For 
the  purpose  of  furnishing  an  illustration  of  what  should 
and  can  be  always  done  in  this  matter,  a  special  investi- 
gation was  made  in  Howard  and  Queen  Anne  counties, 
the  former  located  in  the  central  part  of  the  Eastern 
Shore,  the  latter  in  the  central  section  of  the  Western 
Shore.1  In  these  counties  attendance  was  poorest  in  the 
colored  schools  and  best  in  the  city  schools  (Ellicott 
City  and  Centerville) .     (Fig.  15.)     The  great  difficulty 

FIG.  15 


PERCENT  OT  ATTEtWANCE  IN  HOWARD  AND  QUEEN  ANNE  COUNTIES 

„ ONE  ROOM  MORE  THAN  ONE  ROOM        ,  __, 

COLORED  RURAL  VILLAGE  CITY 

<r  ^r  vf  {kJ 


*Data  were  collected  upon  the  number  of  days  each  child  enrolled  was 
in  school  during  the  Winter  Term  of  1915.  In  presenting  these  data, 
attendance  is  computed  upon  the  basis  of  the  number  of  days  the  schools 
were  open  during  the  term  in  question  and  upon  the  number  of  days  of 
actual  attendance.  Ordinarily,  attendance  is  computed  upon  the  basis 
of  the  days  in  school  after  a  child  once  enrolls,  no  account  thus  being 
taken  of  the  days  lost  or  the  absence  due  to  entering  a  week  or  two  after 
the  opening  of  the  term. 


98 


PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 


of  getting  to  and  from  school  accounts  in  part  only  for 
the  lower  attendance  in  the  case  of  the  one-room  rural 
and  village  school  as  compared  with  the  city  schools.  No 
small  part  of  the  difference  is  doubtless  due  to  lack  of 
interest  in  education  on  the  part  of  parents.  This  lack  is 
clearly  revealed  when  the  difference  of  age  is  taken  into 
account.  For  at  every  age,  city  children  attend  more 
regularly  than  country  children.     (Fig.  16.)     Now,  the 


FIG.   1 6 

PERCENT  OF  ABSENCE    BY  AGES  IN  RUKAL  AND  CITY  SCHOOLS 
FOR  HOWARD  AND  QUEEN  ANNE  COUNTIES 
ONE  ROOM  R.URAJL  CITY  SCHOOLS 

PERCENT 

AGE      10    20    30   40    50    GO    70    80  90    100  90   80    70    60    50  40    30    20    10 


country  boy  has  no  pressing  work  on  the  farm  in  winter. 
Differences  in  physical  conditions  do  not,  therefore, 
clearly  explain  why  86  per  cent,  of  the  city  children  of  13 
attend  school  as  against  63  per  cent,  of  country  children; 
or  why  88  per  cent,  of  the  city  children  of  14  attend  as 
against  56  per  cent,  of  country  children.  The  attitude 
of  parents  and  the  quality  of  the  instruction  are  factors 


ENROLMENT  AND  ATTENDANCE     99 

of  great  importance,  especially  in  the  absence  of  effective 
machinery  for  bringing  about  attendance. 

Even  more  striking  are  the  differences  in  the  attendance 
of  the  children  of  high  school  age.  In  one-room  rural 
schools,  pupils  15  years  of  age  and  over  comprise  only  9 
per  cent,  of  the  total  enrolment;  and  this  9  per  cent, 
attended  school  only  50  per  cent,  of  the  time.  In  city 
schools,  on  the  other  hand,  this  same  age-group  makes 
up  26  per  cent,  of  the  total  enrolment  and  they  make 
an  attendance  record  of  91  per  cent.  The  failure  of  the 
one-room  rural  school  not  only  to  attract  but  to  hold 
children  15  or  more  years  of  age  thus  unquestionably 
indicates  both  a  lack  of  supporting  sentiment  on  the 
part  of  parents,  and,  quite  as  clearly,  the  inability  of 
the  one-room  rural  school  to  provide  work  suited  to 
the  ability  and  the  interests  of  children  of  high  school 
age. 

Whatever  the  causes  of  the  poor  attendance,  that  14 
per  cent,  of  the  children  enrolled  in  the  schools  of  the 
cities  should  be  absent  every  day  is  bad  enough;  but  that 
as  many  as  36  per  cent,  of  those  in  one-room  rural  schools 
should  be  continuously  absent  is  fatal  to  effective  work. 
What  can  be  expected  in  the  way  of  instruction  when  in 
one-room  rural  schools  31  per  cent,  of  the  children,  in 
the  village  schools  19  per  cent.,  and  in  the  city  schools  8 
per  cent.,  are  absent  on  the  average  more  than  half  the 
time?  The  significance  of  these  facts  in  terms  of  the 
amount  of  instruction  received  is  illustrated  by  condi- 
tions in  a  fifth  grade  containing  6  pupils  in  the  Sandy 


ioo        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

Mountain  School  of  Carroll  County.  During  the  first 
ioo  days  of  the  past  school  year,  the  number  of  spelling 
lessons  received  by  each  pupil  was  as  follows:  One  pupil 
received  the  full  ioo  lessons — for  he  was  never  absent — 
the  second  received  98,  the  third  94,  the  fourth  81,  the 
fifth  69,  the  sixth  57,  for  he  was  absent  almost  half  of  the 
time.  If  the  work  to  be  properly  done  required  100 
lessons,  a  pupil  receiving  only  57  lessons  has  at  best 
covered  but  slightly  more  than  half  of  the  work  of  the 
grade. 

The  effect  of  absence  would  be  less  disastrous  if  it  were 
continuous  at  some  one  period;  that  is,  one  prolonged 
absence  is  infinitely  preferable  to  recurrence  of  brief  peri- 
ods of  absence.  Yet  recurrence  is  the  rule.  The  child 
comes  to  school  for  a  few  days  and  then  stays  away  a  few 
days;  and  thus  throughout  the  year.  A  single  case  will 
illustrate.  Pupil  "A"  in  School  No.  2,  District  7, 
Carroll  County,  was  present  the  first  four  days  of 
the  first  week  of  the  term.  Then  an  absence  of  five 
days  occurred,  followed  by  five  days  in  school  and 
eight  days  out.  A  single  day  covered  the  next  period 
of  attendance;  then  five  days  of  absence;  next  two  days 
at  school  and  two  at  home,  and  so  on  to  the  end  of  the 
term. 

Absence  destroys  the  morale  and  wastes  the  time  not 
only  of  the  absentee  but  of  the  entire  school.  A  teacher, 
seeking  to  keep  the  absentees  up  with  the  class,  gives 
them  special  attention  when  they  do  attend,  and  in  this 
way  neglects  the  pupils  regularly  at  school.     Or,  despair- 


ENROLMENT  AND  ATTENDANCE     101 

ing  of  keeping  the  absentees  up  to  grade,  she  makes  of 
them  a  separate  group,  thus  adding  to  the  already  exces- 
sive number  of  classes.  Effective  work  is  impossible 
under  such  conditions. 

The  friends  of  public  education  in  Maryland  have  not 
been  unaware  of  the  situation  which  we  have  described. 
The  State  Board  of  Education,  the  county  superintend- 
ents, and  bodies  of  citizens  have  repeatedly  urged  the 
passage  of  a  compulsory  school  attendance  law.  At  a 
recent  session  of  the  legislature  their  hopes  seemed  about 
to  be  realized.  When,  however,  the  proposed  bill  came 
from  the  legislature  most  of  its  effective  features  had  been 
eliminated.  Worse  still,  compulsory  measures  were 
made  optional  with  the  county  school  boards,  Howard, 
Kent,  Anne  Arundel,  Worcester,  St.  Mary's,  and 
Somerset  counties  being  even  denied  the  privilege  of 
exercising  an  option.  Wretched  as  is  this  makeshift, 
the  law  has  had  a  perceptible  effect,  as  is  evidenced  by  the 
increase  of  attendance  between  1910  and  1914.1  Mary- 
land is,  however,  for  all  practical  purposes  still  without 
an  attendance  law  worthy  of  the  name.  In  consequence, 
her  public  schools  are  now  reaching  less  than  three- 
fourths  of  the  white  children  of  school  age  (6-18),  while 
probably  half  of  her  white  children  are  taking  up  the 
duties  of  parenthood  and  of  citizenship  with  a  fifth-grade 
education  or  less.  More  money  may  be  spent  upon 
schoolhouses,  better  prepared  and  higher  priced  teachers 


'See  Figs.  12  and  13. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

.._  .     i-*.T-n-.»viA     (irit  r  mr'TT1    T  TT3T?  1 


102        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

may  be  employed,  and  adequate  professional  control  and 
supervision  may  be  provided,  but  unless  the  children  of 
school  age  are  gotten  into  the  schools  and  kept  there 
regularly,  the  results  achieved  must  continue  to  be  unsat- 
isfactory. 


VIII.    INSTRUCTION 

OF  ALL  the  difficulties  connected  with  judging  an 
educational  system,  perhaps  the  most  serious  is 
the  difficulty  of  reaching  and  justifying  a  judg- 
ment as  to  the  quality  of  instruction.  Within  any  given 
system,  no  matter  what  the  conditions  in  respect  to  the 
training  of  teachers,  their  appointment,  or  their  super- 
vision, great  variations,  arising  from  differences  of  ability 
and  industry,  will  inevitably  occur.  Under  the  most 
unfavorable  circumstances  effective  teaching  will  some- 
times be  found.  It  would  therefore  be  unfair  to«brand 
all  the  teaching  in  Maryland  as  poor,  simply  because 
general  conditions  make  for  poor  teaching. 

Again,  the  investigator's  unaided  judgment  is  not  in- 
variably sound.  It  ought  to.be  possible  to  prove  teach- 
ing good  or  bad  by  objective  tests;  and  indeed  a  promis- 
ing movement  in  this  direction  is  well  under  way. 
Aside,  however,  from  other  obstacles,  the  technique  of 
testing  is  perhaps  hardly  as  yet  well  enough  established 
to  warrant  a  state-wide  application.  Besides  the  defects 
of  teaching  to  which  we  shall  call  attention  are  too  obvi- 
ous, too  widespread  to  require  elaborate  demonstration. 

In  the  course  of  our  study  of  public  education  in  Mary- 
land, elementary  schools  were  visited  in  every  county 

i°3 


104        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

of  the  state;  altogether  more  than  450  elementary  teach- 
ers were  observed  in  giving  about  900  lessons,  every  grade 
and  every  subject  being  included.  As  schools  were  vis- 
ited at  random,  it  may  be  considered  that  the  general 
situation  was  adequately  sampled.  The  points  in  refer- 
ence to  which  instruction  was  observed  were,  as  will 
appear  in  the  course  of  this  chapter,  simple,  fundamental, 
and  untechnical.  In  the  first  place,  we  tried  to  ascertain 
whether  the  instruction  was  such  as  to  promise  children  a 
competent  mastery  of  the  necessary  tools  of  knowledge 
— reading,  writing,  spelling,  and  arithmetic;  whether  good 
judgment  or  poor  judgment  was  used  in  determining  the 
amount  and  character  of  the  material  studied  in  these  sub- 
jects. Were  children  reading  well-selected  pieces?  Were 
they  learning  to  spell  usable  or  useless  words?  Were  they 
doing  sensible  or  absurd  arithmetical  problems? 

In  addition  to  the  fundamental  studies  the  course  of 
study  in  Maryland  includes  a  considerable  variety  of 
subjects — geography,  history,  literature,  science,  etc. — 
subjects  that  have  not  only  instrumental  but  inspira- 
tional value.  They  assist  a  child  to  find  his  place  in  the 
world  and  society;  they  increase  the  range  of  his  interests 
and  activities.  Such  subjects  may  be  mechanically 
taught,  so  as  to  do  little  good,  or  they  may  be  inspiringly 
taught,  so  as  to  stir  the  child  more  or  less  deeply.  Where- 
ever  we  went,  we  endeavored  to  gauge  the  child's  reaction 
—to  determine,  that  is,  whether  the  instruction  was  genu- 
ine or  merely  routine. 

Closely  allied  is  another  point  of  view.     We  spoke  just 


INSTRUCTION  105 

now  of  helping  the  child  to  find  his  place  in  the  world. 
The  schools  used  to  do  their  teaching  regardless  of  chil- 
dren's experiences  and  environment.  Nowadays  there  is 
general  agreement  that  the  child's  experiences  and  sur- 
roundings furnish  the  teacher  with  material  to  be  used,  and 
suggest  to  him  important  ends  to  strive  toward.  With- 
out pretending  to  offer  in  this  connection  a  complete 
theory  of  education,  we  venture  to  think  that  instruc- 
tion may  fairly  be  viewed  from  the  standpoint  of  the 
child's  experiences,  immediate  surroundings,  and  probable 
needs. 

Finally,  the  child's  progress  is  to  be  considered.  The 
very  term  "course  of  study"  suggests  orderly  develop- 
ment. The  Maryland  elementary  school  course,  occupy- 
ing seven  years,  promises  systematic  progress  through 
a  variety  of  studies.  Does  the  instruction  realize  the 
promise?  Do  children  move  from  point  to  point  without 
needless  friction  and  waste?  Or  is  the  classroom  work 
more  or  less  of  treadmill  character? 

These,  then,  are  the  questions  informally  asked  re- 
garding the  work  of  the  Maryland  teachers.  Do  children 
learn  to  master  the  fundamental  subjects?  Are  their 
interests  stimulated?  Are  the  materials  well  chosen? 
Are  local  needs  heeded?  Are  time  and  energy  conserved? 
The  questions  are  obviously  not  exhaustive,  but,  as  will 
appear,  they  amply  serve  our  present  purpose. 

A  casual  visitor  whose  good  fortune  led  him  into 
selected  schools  in  almost  any  county  might  answer 
these   questions   in    the  affirmative.     In  almost  every 


io6        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

county  of  the  state  some  teachers  are  doing  excellent 
work.  Their  schoolrooms  are  bright  and  attractive; 
their  pupils  alert  and  happy;  their  methods  intelligent 
and  effective;  the  course  of  study  is  adapted  to  individual 
and  to  community  needs.  The  teacher's  ability,  train- 
ing, and  ambition  triumph  over  whatever  adverse  condi- 
tions may  exist. 

Nonetheless,  the  system  does  not  tend  to  produce  these 
results;  they  come  about  in  spite  of  the  system.  In 
the  main,  therefore,  while  gladly  recognizing  the  existence 
of  exceptions,  we  are  constrained  to  answer  negatively 
the  questions  above  asked.  Children  do  not,  for  the 
most  part,  learn  to  master  their  tools ;  their  interests  are 
far  from  sufficiently  stimulated;  local  needs  get,  as  a  rule, 
scant  attention;  time  and  energy  are  freely  wasted. 

In  the  first  place,  the  general  attitude  of  most  teachers 
is  unsound.  They  regard  it  as  their  main  business,  after 
keeping  order,  to  impart  to  children  a  prescribed  body 
of  facts  or  information — so  much  spelling,  so  much  arith- 
metic, so  much  geography.  The  facts  are  all  there  in  the 
text-books,  and  the  teachers  proceed  on  the  assumption 
that  one  fact  is  as  good  as  another.  Whatever  is  printed 
on  the  page  is  taught  without  discrimination.  Imagine, 
then,  a  teacher  giving  a  sixth-grade  class  of  rural  children 
a  spelling  lesson  made  up  of  such  words  as  monsieur, 
connoisseur,  sobriquet,  sang  froid,  and  so  on.  A  third- 
grade  geography  lesson  upon  the  Middle  Atlantic  States 
illustrates  the  same  point.  "Name  the  Middle  Atlantic 
States,"  directs  the  teacher,  and  the  pupils  answer  either 


INSTRUCTION  107 

individually  or  in  concert.  "What  is  the  capital  of 
Maryland?"  "Of  what  is  Washington  the  capital?" 
"Who  knows  what  Washington  is  on?"  "What  is  the 
capital  of  Virginia?"  So  on  for  the  remaining  states  of 
this  division.  Not  a  single  question  was  put  by  the 
teacher  calculated  to  arouse  interest,  to  compel  thought, 
or  to  bring  out  the  meaning  of  what  had  been  memorized. 
Nor  did  the  teacher  make  a  single  comment  herself. 
Thus,  in  subject  after  subject,  children  are  expected  to 
acquire  facts  through  memorizing  printed  pages.  Mean- 
while, strange  though  it  seem,  not  half  the  400  teachers 
visited  felt  that  they  themselves  must  know  these  facts. 
For  the  majority,  while  conducting  the  recitation,  were 
compelled  to  keep  their  eyes  glued  on  the  text  in  order  to 
ask  the  questions;  not  infrequently  the  whole  perform- 
ance stopped,  so  as  to  enable  the  teacher  to  read  ahead 
to  the  next  question.  Sometimes  the  teacher  was  com- 
pelled to  look  at  the  book  to  see  whether  the  answers 
given  were  correct. 

Not  only  must  the  child  "  recite  "  the  facts  just  learned, 
he  must,  of  course,  "retain"  them.  Hence  they  must  be 
thoroughly  beaten  in  and  fixed  permanently  in  memory. 
Thus  endless  reviews  and  ever-recurrent  drills  are  ac- 
counted for.  In  some  schools  as  much  as  half  of  the 
school  year  is  devoted  to  "reviews";  not  uncommonly 
it  was  stated  that  pupils  had  covered  the  same  books 
three  or  four  times.  A  certain  amount  of  review  is,  of 
course,  needed  to  bring  out  the  relations  between  differ- 
ent subjects  and  different  parts  of  the  same  subject; 


10S        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

so  also  a  certain  amount  of  properly  conducted  drill,  in 
order  to  gain  accuracy  and  facility  in  conducting  funda- 
mental operations.  But  reviewing  and  drilling  as  carried 
on  in  most  Maryland  schools  is  a  cruel  and  wasteful 
procedure  calculated  to  kill  interest  and  to  destroy  the 
child's  capacity  for  constructive  thinking. 

A  volume  of  this  kind  is  not  the  place  for  a  full  expo- 
sition of  modern  ideas  on  teaching  method.  It  may, 
however,  not  be  amiss  to  point  out  that  a  "recitation," 
instead  of  the  mechanical  process  above  described,  should 
be  a  cooperative  and  constructive  enterprise,  in  which 
children  work  out  a  problem,  each  doing  his  part  accord- 
ing to  his  ability  and  special  assignment.  It  may  take 
dramatic  form — one  child  being  the  "big  bear,"  another 
the  "mother  bear,"  still  another  the  "little  bear,"  and 
one  "Silver  Locks";  or  one  group  of  pupils  may  solve 
and  explain  to  the  class  a  given  set  of  examples,  while 
another  group  is  engaged  with  other  problems ;  or  in  the 
study  of  such  topics  as  Tomato  Raising  on  the  Eastern 
Shore,  the  Manufacture  and  Distribution  of  Fertilizer, 
Sa'nitary  Conditions  in  the  School  District,  one  pupil 
may  look  up  illustrative  material  such  as  pictures,  while 
another  arranges  experiments,  and  still  another  brings 
before  the  class  a  review  of  what  they  have  already 
learned.  Thus  in  a  hundred  ways  the  recitation  may  be 
made  a  period  of  working  together  in  the  achievement 
of  a  common  end,  quickening  the  interest  of  the  children, 
giving  them  opportunity  to  think,  and  engendering  a 
social    spirit.     And,    be    it    repeated,    here    and    there 


INSTRUCTION  109 

throughout  the  state  one  really  encounters  classroom 
work  of  this  description. 

The  problem  of  discipline  hinges  largely  on  the  quality 
of  instruction.  Generally  speaking,  there  exists  in  Mary- 
land a  cordial  relation  between  pupils  and  teachers;  the 
children  seem  anxious  to  do  what  is  required.  Still  they 
would  not  be  human  if  they  did  not  involuntarily  revolt 
against  a  system  of  education  which  consigns  active  boys 
and  girls,  for  long  periods  of  time,  to  uncomfortable 
desks  to  pore  over  text-books,  only  to  be  called  up  and 
questioned  upon  what  they  have  just  absorbed.  Under 
such  conditions  it  is  not  surprising  that  the  more  vigor- 
ous and  active  find  secret  ways  of  amusement,  while  the 
majority  sit  passive,  doing  worse  than  nothing  a  consid- 
erable part  of  the  time. 

There  is  a  tendency,  nowadays,  to  account  for  ineffec- 
tive teaching  of  the  fundamental  branches  on  the  ground 
that  teachers  and  children  are  so  distracted  by  "recent 
fads"  that  there  is  neither  time  nor  energy  left  for  the 
"essentials."  Whether  or  not  this  apology  is  anywhere 
valid,  it  is  not  for  us  to  say;  at  least,  it  has  no  application 
to  Maryland.  The  state  course  of  study  does  indeed 
require  that  certain  modern  subjects  should  be  taught; 
but  its  injunctions  are  not  usually  followed.  Manual 
training  and  domestic  science,  for  example,  are  found  as 
a  rule  only  in  cities,  though  Baltimore  and  Wicomico 
counties  encourage  their  use  in  rural  districts,  too.  Mu- 
sic is  usually  limited  to  the  singing  of  songs  in  connection 
with  morning  exercises;  little  attention  is,  as  a  rule,  paid 


no        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

to  drawing.  In  many  cities  and  in  quite  all  villages  and 
rural  sections,  the  only  branches  taught  are  reading, 
writing,  spelling,  language  and  grammar,  arithmetic, 
geography,  history,  and  physiology.  To  the  three  R's 
Maryland  children  now  devote  fully  three-quarters  of 
their  school  time.  In  some  counties  arithmetic  con- 
sumes almost  half  of  the  entire  school  day;  not  exceeding 
one-quarter  of  the  day  goes  to  geography,  history,  physi- 
ology, and  to  whatever  there  may  be  in  the  way  of  music, 
drawing,  and  the  like.  Under  these  conditions  there  is 
certainly  no  ground  in  Maryland  for  thinking  that  the 
"fads"  have  usurped  the  place  of  the  "important" 
studies. 

Meanwhile,  the  time  that  might  well  be  devoted  to  the 
so-called  "fads"  is  worse  than  wasted.  Too  untrained 
to  make  use  of  alternative  occupations — -weaving,  bas- 
ketry, literature,  art,  industry,  or  domestic  science — the 
teacher  is  hard  put  to  it  to  keep  the  class  constantly  occu- 
pied with  book  and  seat  work.  Hence  little  children  are 
required  to  copy  the  alphabet  over  and  over,  or  to  write 
again  and  again  the  numerals  from  one  to  a  hundred,  or, 
on  occasions,  up  to  two  or  three  thousand.  Older  chil- 
dren, having  acquired  some  ability  to  write,  are  set  to 
copying  page  after  page  of  their  readers,  or  to  solving 
on  paper  long  lists  of  problems  placed  on  the  blackboard. 
Thus  to  kill  time,  the  first-grade  pupils  divide  7,649,634  by 
7,  and  third-grade  pupils  divide  35,897,678,926  by  2,076. 
A  favorite  task,  especially  for  older  children,  is  to  require 
them  to  write  a  corrected  mistake  50  or  100  times! 


INSTRUCTION  in 

Of  course  formal  reiterative  work  of  this  kind  quickly 
degenerates  into  a  purely  mechanical  repetition,  during 
which  the  child's  mind  goes  "  wool-gathering,"  though 
the  hands  keep  working  away.  Children  may  be  kept 
"busy"  through  such  assignments,  but  they  will  never 
be  "taught."  This  is  illustrated  by  the  well-known 
story  of  the  boy  who  having  spelt  "gone"  "gorn"  was 
required  to  write  500  times,  "I  have  gone  home."  He 
completed  the  distasteful  task  by  writing:  "I  am  done 
and  I  have  gorn  home." 

When  the  methods  described  fail,  as  fail  they  must, 
the  untrained  teacher  naturally  leaps  to  the  conclusion 
that  "more  time"  is  needed.  Accordingly,  large  assign- 
ments and  enormous  tasks  are  given  out  for  home  work. 
In  consequence,  children  going  home  from  school  are  to 
be  seen  almost  everywhere  with  bundles  of  books  por- 
tending night  study.  If  school  conditions  were  good, 
there  would  be  no  occasion  for  night  work  on  the  part 
of  growing  children.  But  even  as  conditions  now  are,  in 
the  majority  of  schools,  no  useful  end  is  served  by  it. 
The  children  had  better  spend  their  after-school  time  at 
play,  helping  about  the  farm  or  the  home,  reading  or 
asleep.  "Home  work"  merely  lengthens  the  hours  of 
mechanical  school  drudgery.  Nor  is  the  value  of  the  in- 
struction any  greater,  even  if  some  children  can  be 
tempted  by  prizes  and  privileges,  to  make  greater  efforts 
to  master  it. 

What  we  have  said  above  as  to  the  general  character 
of  instruction  may  be  briefly  illustrated  by  separate  sub- 


ii2        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

jects.  The  most  important  of  the  common  school  studies 
is  reading;  and  reading  is  important  because — and  only 
because — it  is  a  key  to  meanings,  to  ideas,  to  information, 
etc.  A  child  should  therefore  be  taught  not  only  to  pro- 
nounce printed  words,  but  to  gather  and  to  express  the 
meaning  of  what  he  reads;  for  which  purpose  he  should  be 
trained  to  -read  not  only  aloud,  but,  as  the  children  say, 
"to  himself."  The  children  in  the  Maryland  schools, 
like,  we  are  in  candor  compelled  to  add,  the  children  in 
most  other  schools,  get  little  exercise  in  the  art  of  reading 
beyond  the  mechanical  utterance  of  printed  words  and 
sentences.  Little  or  nothing  is  done  in  the  reading  les- 
son to  arouse  the  imagination;  reading  is  rarely  used  to 
cultivate  facility  in  oral  expression.  Lacking,  then,  an 
adequate  motive,  reading  in  the  lower  grades  is  apt  to 
degenerate  into  mere  mumbling,  and  in  the  upper  grades 
to  drop  out  almost  altogether.  Only  here  and  there  does 
one  find  a  teacher  who  realizes  the  possibilities  of  the 
subject. 

Spelling  is  in  substantially  the  same  situation.  In  the 
elementary  schools  children  should,  for  obvious  reasons, 
learn  to  spell  the  words  they  themselves  ordinarily  use, 
the  words  they  ordinarily  hear,  the  words  used  in  the 
other  branches  which  they  study,  and,  finally,  words  that 
are  in  common  daily  use.  These  words  children  must 
and  can  know  both  how  to  spell  and  how  to  use.  The 
Maryland  schools  have  reached  no  such  conclusions  as 
these  on  the  subject  of  spelling.  To  them,  as  already 
pointed  out,  a  word  is  a  word,  and  it  is  just  as  important 


INSTRUCTION  113 

to  learn  one  word  as  another.  Accordingly,  long  and  in- 
discriminate lists  are  given  out,  and  from  the  fourth 
grade  up,  children  endeavor  unsuccessfully  to  become 
letter  perfect  in  the  acquisition  of  from  20  to  50  words 
a  day. 

Arithmetic,  like  spelling,  is  a  tool  needed  for  the 
transaction  of  the  ordinary  affairs  of  life.  It  ought, 
therefore,  to  be  studied  in  connection  with  its  uses;  it  is, 
moreover,  a  waste  of  time  to  study  any  more  of  it  than 
can  be  used.  Dry  measure  is  thus  not  a  table  to  be 
memorized  from  a  book,  but  an  instrument  needed  in 
order  to  buy  potatoes,  apples,  peaches,  and  the  like  from 
the  neighboring  store.  Occasionally — it  would  perhaps 
be  more  nearly  accurate  to  say  "rarely"  —one  sees  arith- 
metic taught  in  Maryland  from  this  standpoint.  The 
teacher,  in  these  instances,  centres  arithmetic  almost 
entirely  upon  farming  and  its  problems,  leading  the 
children  to  see  that  arithmetic  is  the  basis  of  intelligent 
farm  management.  Incidentally,  arithmetic  managed 
in  this  way  affords  the  teacher  opportunity  to  give  valu- 
able lessons  upon  soils,  crops,  and  soil  exhaustion,  and  to 
study  the  ingredients  of  different  fertilizers  in  relation 
to  the  needs  of  the  locality.  The  child  learns  to  "figure, " 
and  much  besides. 

For  the  most  part,  however,  arithmetic  is  taught  in  the 
schools  of  Maryland  without  reference  to  its  uses;  under 
which  conditions  one  thing  is  just  as  important  as  an- 
other. Cube  root  and  the  mensuration  of  cubes,  pyra- 
mids, and  truncated  cones  receive  as  much  attention  as 


ii4        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

home  and  farm  accounting.  Instruction,  then,  degen- 
erates into  memorizing  formal  tables  and  rules  and  the 
solution  of  printed  problems.  This  formal  work,  al- 
ready occupying  from  a  fourth  to  a  half  of  the  time  of  the 
children  at  school,  is  also  carried  off  to  the  home,  where 
by  lamplight  long  lists  of  printed  problems  are  copied 
and  solved  by  way  of  preparation  for  the  next  day,  when 
the  same  problems  are  re-copied  and  re-solved.  Not 
infrequently  children  have  copied  and  solved,  re-copied 
and  re-solved  these  problems  so  many  times  that  they  can 
repeat  whole  pages  of  them  from  memory. 

While  some  good  teaching  was  observed  in  the  field  of 
geography,  the  greater  part  of  the  teachers  do  not  realize 
that  the  prime  source  of  geographic  materials  is  the 
immediate  environment  of  the  school :  the  mountains  and 
hills,  the  rivers  and  valleys,  the  effect  of  climate  and 
change  of  season  upon  vegetable  life,  animal  life,  and 
local  industrial  and  commercial  activities.  Instead,  they 
follow  a  printed  text.  Hence,  children  recite  haltingly 
about  tidal-rivers  and  their  significance,  without  knowing 
that  the  brook  just  across  from  the  schoolhouse  is  a 
tidal-river;  or  they  answer  questions  about  the  Appala- 
chian Mountains,  even  giving  the  names  and  location  of 
the  minor  ranges,  without  realizing  that  the  mountains 
seen  from  the  schoolhouse  window  are  the  ones  they  are 
talking  about.  Again,  in  physiology,  pupils  recite  about 
bacteria,  first  aid,  and  various  ailments.  Meanwhile, 
they  breathe  an  atmosphere  filled  with  the  dust  just 
raised  by  an  old-fashioned  broom,  use  not  infrequently 


INSTRUCTION  115 

a  common  dipper,  and  resort  to  filthy  and  unsanitary 
outhouses. 

All  the  problems  of  instruction  are  complicated  in  the 
one-room  school.  Before  good  instruction  can  be  gen- 
erally expected  in  such  schools  the  state  must  plan  a 
simple  course  of  study,  with  alternating  classes,  so  that 
the  number  of  classes  may  be  reduced.  This  course  of 
study  should  not  be  copied  from  city  schools,  but  must 
be  adapted  to  the  education  of  country  children  under 
rural  conditions.  It  may  also  be  found  necessary  to 
limit  to  less  than  seven  the  grades  of  work  to  be  covered 
in  the  one-room  schools.  At  all  events,  classes  above 
the  seventh  grade  formed  for  the  convenience  of  two  or 
three  advanced  pupils  must  be  abandoned.  Twenty-five 
to  thirty-five  daily  recitations — the  average  in  the  one- 
room  rural  school — are  more  than  can  be  well  handled. 
If  eight  or  ten  more  "classes"  are  added  for  the  benefit 
of  two  or  three  advanced  pupils,  the  teacher's  energies 
are  so  scattered  that  no  one  gets  proper  attention  in  any- 
thing. Provision  must  be  made  for  these  older  pupils 
in  consolidated  schools. 

On  the  one  hand,  therefore,  the  one-room  school 
must  be  simplified  and  better  organized;  on  the  other, 
wherever  possible,  one-room  schools  should  be  consoli- 
dated so  that  a  larger  body  of  pupils  may  be  properly 
graded,  and  better  equipment,  better  teachers,  and  better 
accommodations  provided  for  them.  There  is  not  a 
county  in  Maryland  in  which  the  number  of  one-room 
schools  could  not  thus  be  greatly  reduced.     Something 


n6        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

has  indeed  already  been  accomplished  in  this  direction. 
In  Prince  George  County  the  Baden  Agricultural  High 
School,  organized  in  191 1,  took  the  place  of  two  one-room 
schools  and  now  draws  the  older  pupils  from  eight  others. 
The  enrolment  for  the  entire  region  has  increased,  and  the 
attendance,  particularly  of  the  older  children,  improved. 
A  better  school  spirit  has  developed,  and  the  community 
is  inordinately  proud  of  its  consolidated  school.  Similar 
results  have  also  been  achieved  at  the  Sparks  Agricul- 
tural High  School,  Baltimore  County.  Howard,  Mont- 
gomery, Caroline,  and  a  few  others  also  furnish  examples. 
But  consolidation  is  not  yet  an  active  state  policy. 

Instruction  in  the  colored  schools  is,  as  one  would 
expect,  distinctly  inferior  to  that  in  the  white  schools. 
There  is,  however,  a  movement  well  under  way  which 
is  contributing  to  improvement.  Through  the  aid  of  the 
state  at  least  one  central  industrial  school  has  been 
established  in  each  of  sixteen  counties.  In  these  central 
schools  industrial  instruction  is  confined  in  the  main  to 
the  older  children,  comprising  for  girls  sewing  and  cook- 
ing, and  for  the  boys  woodwork.  The  girls  make  some 
of  their  own  clothes  and  cook,  while  the  boys  make  from 
wood  simple  household  articles  and  furniture.  The  in- 
struction is  exceedingly  practical,  usually  of  good  quality, 
giving  girls  a  training  in  home  duties  and  boys  some  skill 
with  tools  and  an  appreciation  of  manual  labor. 

Under  the  direction  of  the  colored  supervisor  indus- 
trial instruction  is  being  gradually  introduced  into  the 
rural  and  village  schools  of  counties  possessing  a  central 


v« 


*■ 


11 


mt 


ii 
n 


ll 
II 


Consolidated  Agricultural  Ilitrli  School 


School  van  drawn  by  oxen 


INSTRUCTION  117 

school  of  the  type  just  described.  In  the  lower  grades 
children  do  paper-cutting  and  basketry;  the  girls  have 
simple  sewing,  and  the  boys  whittling.  In  the  upper 
grades  the  girls  learn  plain  sewing  and  dressmaking  and, 
in  a  few  schools,  some  cooking.  While  the  boys  in  the 
one-room  schools  are  handicapped  for  lack  of  a  shop  and 
tools,  they  are,  nevertheless,  doing  some  woodwork, 
making  articles  for  the  home  and  doing  repairs  about  the 
schoolhouse;  in  one  case  they  have  drained  the  school 
grounds,  repaired  the  sidewalk  and  fence,  and  painted 
the  school  building. 

Instruction  in  the  high  schools  is  but  little  better  than 
that  in  the  elementary  schools  and  is  in  general  character- 
ized by  the  same  defects.1  For,  like  the  elementary 
school  teacher,  the  high  school  teacher  lacks  proper  pro- 
fessional training;  and,  like  the  elementary  school,  the 
high  school,  despite  its  recent  development,  is  hampered 
by  tradition. 

The  public  high  schools  of  Maryland  have  grown 
rapidly  since  1905.  The  first  list  of  accredited  high 
schools,  carrying  out  acceptably  the  course  of  study 
prescribed  by  the  state,  made  up  in  1905,  included  only 
28  schools  with  an  enrolment  of  2,049  ^children  and  88 
teachers.  Since  then  an  entire  year  has  been  added  to 
the  course  and  the  state  standards  have  become  some- 
what more  exacting;  nevertheless,  there  were  in  19 14,  65 


'High  schools  were  visited  in  every  county  of  the  state  having  them. 
In  addition  to  conferences  with  principals  and  teachers,  classwork  was 
carefully  observed  in  fifty  schools. 


nS        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

accredited  high  schools  enrolling  5,500  pupils  and  em- 
ploying 221  teachers.  Not  a  few  of  these  schools  are  the 
outgrowths  of  old  academies. 

In  this  transition  from  the  academy  to  the  public  high 
school  the  aims  and  methods  of  the  academy  were  un- 
fortunately very  largely  carried  over.  The  old  acad- 
emy, though  it  rendered  a  worthy  service  in  its  day,  was  a 
"select"  school,  privately  controlled,  which  prepared 
for  college  and  gave  to  those  not  going  farther  a  "cul- 
tural" education.  Handicapped  by  this  tradition,  too 
many  of  the  new  high  schools  promote  "cultural"  educa- 
tion and  preparation  for  college.  Latin  and  mathemat- 
ics continue  to  dominate  the  curriculum.  There  is,  of 
course,  no  reason  why  children  who  desire  to  study  Latin 
should  be  prevented  from  doing  so.  But  in  Maryland 
they  are  practically  compelled  to  study  Latin,  though, 
legally,  the  subject  is  not  compulsory.  In  the  main,  it  is 
so  poorly  taught,  that,  aside  from  the  waste  of  time  and 
energy,  most  students  must  be  contracting  from  it  habits 
of  thought  and  expression  that  are  a  real  handicap. 

Hardly  better  is  the  plight  of  mathematics.  The  state 
requirements  are  not  unusual,  including  algebra  through 
quadratics  and  plane  geometry.  But  few  high  schools 
are  content  with  this;  the  majority  offer,  besides,  ad- 
vanced algebra,  solid  geometry,  and  trigonometry. 
Whether  all  high  school  pupils,  both  boys  and  girls, 
should  be  required  to  study  algebra  and  geometry,  is 
sufficiently  doubtful;  indeed  an  increasingly  influential 
body  of  educators  would  answer  in  the  negative.     But 


s. 


3 
-a 


-a 


O 

U 


INSTRUCTION  119 

as  to  advanced  algebra,  solid  geometry,  and  trigonometry 
there  is  no  doubt  whatsoever.  To  constrain  students  in 
numbers  to  take  these  subjects  is  simply  unpardonable. 
They  have  long  since  been  dropped  from  the  high  school 
course  of  many  of  our  largest  cities  and  they  should  be 
eliminated  in  Maryland,  too.  The  curriculum  in  com- 
mon use  should  be  so  formulated  that  the  majority  of 
high  school  pupils  will  no  longer  be  forced  to  devote  to 
these  two  studies  from  two-fifths  to  a  half  of  their  entire 
school  time,  to  the  neglect  of  every  other  line  of  legiti- 
mate secondary  instruction. 

The  remainder  of  the  curriculum  need  not  detain  us 
long.  Something  like  one-half  of  the  school  day  is  avail- 
able for  all  other  subjects — English,  history,  civics, 
science,  etc.  The  instruction  in  English  is  extremely 
meagre,  consisting,  as  a  rule,  largely  of  grammar,  rhetoric, 
and  the  learning  of  unimportant  data  in  connection  with 
the  study  of  selected  pieces — a  futile  and  depressing 
expenditure  of  energy;  English  history  occupies  a  place  in 
the  first  year,  while  American  history  is  reviewed  in  the 
fourth;  the  study  of  civics  is  a  memory  grind  not  calcu- 
lated to  give  the  student  any  insight  into  community 
activities  and  needs,  or  to  develop  a  sense  of  civic  pride 
and  social  responsibility. 

The  instruction  in  science  is  also  unsatisfactory.  Out- 
side of  general  science  in  the  first  year,  little  is  ordinarily 
attempted,  only  the  stronger  schools  regularly  offering 
courses  in  biology,  physics,  and  chemistry.  Few  schools 
have  regular  science  teachers;  as  a  rule,  the  subject  is 


120        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

taught  by  teachers  whose  interest  lies  elsewhere.  Ac- 
cordingly, it  happens  that  classes  complete  the  work  in 
general  science  and  even  in  biology  without  making  an 
excursion  or  performing  an  experiment.  Even  in  labora- 
tory sciences  like  chemistry  and  physics  pupils  are  seldom 
required  to  keep  orderly  notebooks.  The  majority  of 
the  high  schools  lack  adequate  scientific  equipment;  the 
"laboratory"  may  be  set  up  in  a  hall  alcove  or  in  a  base- 
ment room.  Naturally  enough,  there  is  in  most  high 
schools  little  interest  in  science  on  the  part  of  either 
teachers  or  pupils. 

From  what  point  of  view  should  the  curricula  of  these 
schools  be  developed?  In  the  rural  sections  of  Mary- 
land the  centre  of  interest  is  in  farming,  stock-raising, 
fruit-growing,  dairying,  poultry-culture,  and  the  like. 
Through  these  and  kindred  activities  country  people 
make  their  living;  in  them  the  country  children  of  to- 
morrow will  find  employment.  A  country  high  school 
must^  indeed — like  a  city  high  school — teach  literature, 
history,  and  civics.  But,  in  addition,  on  the  boy's  side, 
the  curriculum  should  stress  applied  science,  industry, 
and  agriculture;  while,  on  the  girl's  side,  it  should  em- 
phasize domestic  art  and  such  studies  as  equip  women  to 
become  intelligent  home  makers.  The  rural  high  school 
needs  little  commerce  with  ancient  languages  and  col- 
lege entrance  requirements.  The  mass  of  students  who 
do  not  go  to  conventional  colleges  must  not  be  sacrificed 
for  the  few  who  do. 

Again,  the  prosperity  of  the  small  city — and  all  of  the 


to 

< 


INSTRUCTION  121 

cities  of  Maryland,  with  one  exception,  are  small — de- 
pends upon  business  and  productive  industry.  The  on- 
coming generation  will,  for  the  most  part,  be  engaged  in 
retail  trade  and  in  manufacture.  Judging  from  what 
goes  on  in  most  of  the  city  high  schools,  one  would  infer 
that  their  students  are  all  going  to  college  with  the  ulti- 
mate expectation  of  leading  either  a  professional  life  or  a 
life  of  leisure.  There  is  scarcely  anything  in  the  instruc- 
tion to  suggest  that  the  home  town  offers  fields  of  activity 
worthy  of  ambitious  young  people.  The  small  city  high 
schools  must  perhaps  prepare  for  college,  but  their  pri- 
mary aim  should  be  to  give  young  people  an  education 
which,  while  contributing  to  personal  enjoyment  and  re- 
finement, prepares  at  the  same  time  for  the  conditions 
of  life  that  they  will  meet.  By  so  doing,  the  high  school 
will  do  most  for  ninety-five  out  of  every  hundred  stu- 
dents in  attendance. 

Fortunately,  a  beginning  in  the  right  direction  has  al- 
ready been  made.  A  few  of  the  first-group  high  schools 
and  something  less  than  one-half  the  second-group  high 
schools  pay  some  attention  to  agriculture  and  rural  life. 
Two  decidedly  successful  examples  of  this  endeavor  are 
the  rural  high  schools  already  mentioned  at  Sparks  and 
Baden.  The  remainder  of  the  second-group  schools,  to 
say  nothing  of  the  first-group,  still  continue  to  furnish 
country  children  with  a  cityfied  education  which  closes 
their  eyes  to  the  opportunities  of  country  life,  and  tends 
powerfully  to  drive  them  toward  the  towns. 

In  contrast,  the  efforts  of  the  state  in  the  direction  of 


122        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

commercial  courses  have  met  with  unusual  success.  There 
are  now  in  all  first-group  high  schools,  save  one,  and  in  17 
of  the  second-group,  business  departments  offering  two 
years  of  instruction  in  commercial  branches;  their  total 
enrolment  in  1914  was  692  pupils.  Two  factors  account 
for  this  development:  first,  the  desire  of  young  people  for 
a  "useful"  education;  second,  the  desire  to  escape  the 
grind  of  Latin  and  mathematics.  For  these  commercial 
departments  there  is  a  legitimate  place  in  most  first- 
group  schools.  It  is,  however,  questionable  whether 
many  second-group  schools,  rural  as  they  are  in  their 
environment,  should  offer  elaborate  commercial  courses. 
Up  to  the  present  time  there  has  been  little  demand  for 
a  two-year  commercial  course  in  these  second-group 
schools,  most  of  the  commercial  departments  in  them 
being  maintained  at  relatively  heavy  expense  for  the 
accommodation  of  from  5  to  10  pupils.  In  the  second 
place,  commercial  training  once  more  turns  country-bred 
boys  and  girls  away  from  the  farm  to  become  job  seekers 
in  the  cities. 

There  is,  besides,  in  both  first-  and  second-group  high 
schools  a  marked  tendency  to  increase  out  of  all  propor- 
tions the  amount  of  work  demanded  in  the  commercial 
courses.  The  state  course  of  study  wisely  requires  com- 
mercial students  to  devote  a  fourth  to  a  half  of  their  time 
to  general  high  school  work.  But  in  a  number  of  both  first- 
and  second-group  high  schools,  the  prescribed  hours  of 
instruction  in  the  commercial  branches  now  absorb  almost 
the  entire  time  of  the  student,  to  the  neglect  of  studies 


i 


INSTRUCTION  123 

which  contribute  to  general  intelligence  and  breadth  of 
view.  Owing  to  its  inadequate  staff,  the  State  Depart- 
ment of  Education  has  not  been  in  position  to  know  in 
detail  what  the  high  schools  are  doing.  If  the  department 
is  reorganized,  it  will  be  enabled  to  keep  in  touch  with  the 
situation,  and  it  should  have  the  power  in  its  discretion 
to  disapprove  the  establishment  of  special  departments. 

In  the  distribution  of  state  aid  to  secondary  schools, 
consistent  encouragement  has  been  given  to  manual 
training  and  domestic  science.  As  a  result,  these 
branches  are  more  widely  taught  in  Maryland  than 
in  most  states.  While  there  is  still  much  to  be  de- 
sired, children  do  at  least  get  an  opportunity  to  acquire 
practical  information  and  to  gain  skill  in  the  making  of 
real  things;  moreover,  they  obtain  a  certain  amount  of 
relief  from  the  routine  of  conventional  academic  study. 

The  situation  in  the  four-year  state-aided  high  school 
is,  therefore,  not  altogether  unpromising.  Meanwhile, 
aside  from  the  regular  high  schools,  there  are  many  one-  or 
two-room  schools  that  attempt  one  or  more  years  of  high 
school  instruction.  Further,  a  few  schools — such,  for 
example,  as  that  of  Damascus,  Montgomery  County,  and 
some  old  academies  such  as  that  at  Vienna,  Dorchester 
County,1   specially  legislated  into   high   school   status, 

This  school  has  lately  come  under  the  control  of  the  County  Board 
of  Education;  but  when  the  transfer  was  made,  the  academy  trustees, 
while  obligating  the  County  Board  to  continue  the  so-called  high  school 
department,  retained  the  right  to  appoint  the  principal.  Though  ob- 
viously illegal,  this  arrangement  is  by  no  means  uncommon  even  in 
state-aided  high  schools — it  is  found,  for  example,  in  the  high  school 
of  Bel  Air,  Harford  County.    It  should  be  absolutely  prohibited. 


i24       PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

attempt  high  school  work  with  a  single  teacher.  The 
state  ought  to  realize  that  high  school  work  of  this  kind 
is  simply  counterfeit.  Only  through  school  consolida- 
tion and  the  transportation  of  pupils  can  genuine  high 
school  opportunities  be  brought  within  reach  of  all  the 
children  of  Maryland.  The  amount  of  instruction  that 
may  be  offered  in  one-,  two-,  and  three-room  schools  should 
therefore  be  strictly  limited,  and  the  State  Department  of 
Education  must  be  so  equipped  that  the  law  can  be  en- 
forced. 

A  single  paragraph  may  summarize  our  estimate  of 
teaching  in  the  public  schools  of  Maryland.  We  have 
found  the  State  Department  ineffective,  largely  because 
it  lacks  the  necessary  staff;  we  have  found  the  county 
organization  ineffective  because  of  politics,  the  absence 
of  trained  officials,  and  the  low  standards  of  teacher 
training.  How  could  teaching  be  generally  good  under 
these  conditions?  Maryland  gets  precisely  the  kind  and 
quality  of  teaching  which  our  previous  study  would 
lead  us  to  expect.  It  will  improve  teaching  when  it 
improves  the  conditions  responsible  for  it — not  before, 
and  in  no  other  way. 


a 


IX.     FINANCE 

FOR  the  results  which  we  have  just  described,  what 
does  Maryland  pay?  The  education  furnished 
is  mostly  poor:  is  it  also  cheap?  Or  does  the 
state  pay  high  for  what  it  gets?  These  and  some  related 
questions  will  be  answered  in  the  course  of  the  present 
chapter. 

An  increasing  amount  of  money  is  being  annually 
raised  in  Maryland  for  public  education.  The  total 
amount  raised  in  the  entire  state,  including  the  city  of 
Baltimore,  was  in  1870  in  round  terms  a  million  dollars; 
in  1914,  five  millions.     (Fig.  17.)     These  amounts  cover 


o    3 
0 


$ 


FIG.    17 
INCREASE  IN  FUNDS  PROVIDED  FOR,  THE  SCHOOLS 


5.102.000 


/ 

t 

1,353,000 

1870 


1880 


1890 
125 


1900 


1910      1914 


126        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

all  the  money  received  during  the  current  year,  irrespec- 
tive of  whether  it  went  into  new  buildings,  repairs,  teach- 
ers' salaries,  text-books,  or  school  supplies.1 

Does  this  mean  that  the  state  is  paying  more  per  in- 
dividual child?  In  1870  there  were  practically  300,000 
children  of  school  age2  in  the  state;  in  19 10  there  were 
something  over  400,000;  the  exact  increase  was  41  per 
cent.  (Fig.  18.)  Hence,  while  school  population  has 
increased  41  per  cent.,  the  total  school  fund  has  in- 
creased 277  per  cent.  Per  child  of  school  age  (Fig.  19) 
the  amount  available  has  therefore  risen  from  $4.59  in 
1870  to  $12.26  in  1914,  an  increase  of  171  per  cent.3 


xIt  would  be  instructive  to  compare  the  financial  support  of  the  schools 
in  Maryland  with  that  of  other  states,  but  it  is  almost  impossible  to  se- 
cure reliable  data  for  such  comparisons.  Indeed  it  was  only  with  great 
difficulty  that  data  on  the  financial  support  of  the  schools  of  Maryland 
have  been  brought  together.  It  was  impossible  to  use  the  reported  ex- 
penditures as  found  in  the  annual  reports  of  the  State  Board  of  Education, 
because  these  include  payments  of  current  loans,  and  because  of  the 
differences,  especially  some  years  back,  between  the  reported  expenditures 
by  the  several  county  boards  and  their  receipts  as  reported  by  the  State 
Controller.  These  are  samples  of  the  difficulties  encountered  in  com- 
piling accurate  financial  data  for  Maryland.  Similar  revision  would 
have  to  be  made  of  the  published  reports  of  other  states,  if  comparisons 
are  to  be  trustworthy.  One  general  statement  may,  however,  be  made: 
Maryland  is  one  of  the  states  which  make  very  large  state  contribu- 
tions for  local  educational  purposes. 

2In  Chapter  VII  (Enrolment  and  Attendance)  we  used  as  a  basis 
children  between  6  and  18  years  of  age,  though  the  law  regards  all  persons 
between  5  and  20  as  of  school  age.  A  defect  in  the  Federal  Census  com- 
pels us  in  the  present  chapter  to  use  the  number  of  persons  between  5  and 
20  years  old  in  computing  per  capita  cost  and  expenditure.  The  incon- 
sistency is  not,  however,  of  any  practical  importance.  For  the  outcome 
of  this  chapter  would  not  be  different,  even  if  we  had  used  6  to  18  as 
the  basis  of  computation. 

The  amount  available  declined  in  1880,  but  has  risen  steadily  ever 
since. 


FINANCE 


127 


FIG.    18 
INCREASE  IN  SCHOOL  POPULATION  [CHILDREN  5-20) 


J?  4 


§3 


413.9  33 

"294351 

1870 


1890 


1890 


1900 


1910       1914 


Meanwhile,  the  taxable  wealth  of  the  state  has  also  in- 
creased. Has  the  increased  liberality  of  the  state  simply 
kept  pace  with  its  increasing  wealth,  or  is  Maryland 
really  making  relatively  larger  sacrifices  for  public  educa- 
tion? 


fig.  19 

increase  in  school  funds  raised  per  child  of  school  ace 


'12' 


10' 


400 
500 


.459 

*MZ(, 


1870 


I860 


1890 


1900 


1910     1914 


128        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 


The  taxable  wealth  of  the  state  rose  from  423  millions 
in  1870  to  a  billion  in  1914.  (Fig.  20.)  Back  of  each 
school  child  in  1870  there  was  taxable  property  valued  at 


FIG.   20 
INCREASE  IN  TAXABLE  WEALTH 


£, 


10 


'i,0Z(,pK,7i5 


£      7 


z 


-3       2 


/ 

4 

1070 


i860 


1890 


1900 


1910       1914 


$1,440;  back  of  each  child  in  19 14  there  was  taxable 
property  valued  at  $2,460.  (Fig.  21.)  Every  hundred 
dollars  of  taxable  property  contributed  twenty-six  cents 


2500 
2000 
1500 
1000 
500 


FIG.    21 
TAXABLE  WEALTH  BACK  OF  EACH  CHILD  (5-20) 


/ 

TZTQ — — 

24  SO 


18TO 


1880 


1890 


1900 


1910     1914. 


to  education  in  1870;  every  hundred  dollars  of  taxable 
property  contributed  forty-nine  cents  to  education  in 


FINANCE 


129 


1914.  (Fig.  22.)  There  are,  then,  more  children  to  be 
educated  in  Maryland  than  there  were;  there  is  more 
wealth  to  be  drawn  upon;  and  every  dollar  of  wealth 
pays  almost  twice  as  much  as  it  paid  in  1870. 

Education  is,  however,  not  merely  a  question  of  how 
much  is  spent;  much  depends  on  the  different  purposes 
served  by  a  given  expenditure.     Fully  to  understand  the 


g 


FIG.    22 
INCREASE  IN  TAX  LEVY-EQUIVALENT  FOR  PUBLIC  SCHOOLS 


o 
o 


50 
40 
50 
20 
10 


~ZbZ 

496 


C     1870 


1880 


1890 


1900 


1910    1914 


public  school  system  of  Maryland  during  the  period  we 
are  considering,  that  is,  from  1870  to  1914,  we  ought  to 
know  the  amount  of  money  devoted  to  each  of  several 
important  items — to  erecting  new  buildings,  to  repairing 
old  ones,  to  maintaining  the  plant,  to  administration, 
supervision,  teachers'  salaries,  text-books,  supplies,  etc. 
A  proper  system  of  school  accounting  would  supply  such 
information;  unfortunately,  the  older  systems,  among 
them  the  system  still  employed  in  Maryland,  do  not. 
For  this  reason,  one  of  the  improvements  needed  in  the 
State  Department  is  the  introduction  of  an  up-to-date 


i3o        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

system  of  school  accounts.  In  lieu,  therefore,  of  detailed 
knowledge  which  would  enable  us  to  make  a  critical  and 
comparative  study  of  expenditure  and  results,  we  must 
content  ourselves  with  the  consideration  and  comparison 
of  total  amounts  spent  from  year  to  year. 

We  have  thus  far  spoken  in  terms  of  the  entire  school 
population;  i.  e.,  all  persons  between  5  and  20  years  of  age. 
It  is,  of  course,  obvious  that  this  means  the  nominal 
rather  than  the  actual  school  population,  for  children 
below  6  or  above  18  should  be  practically  eliminated  from 
consideration.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  in  1870,  only  38 
children  out  of  each  100  between  5  and  20  years  of  age 
attended  school,  and  in  1914  only  59.     (Fig.  23.)     Our 


FIG.    23 
PPOPOPJION  OP  THE  SCHOOL  POPULATION  ENROLLED  IK  SCHOOL 

60 

50 

30 

seTi^        

"^ 

20 
10 

56.3°!. 


1870 


1880 


1690 


1900 


1910     1914 


computation  of  per  capita  expenditure  on  the  basis  of  the 
legal  school  population,  therefore,  throws  little  light  on 
the  actual  per  capita  expenditure ;  for  the  expenditure  on 
each  child  of  legal  school  age  who  really  attends  school  is 


FINANCE 


131 


much  larger  than  the  amount  of  money  raised  per  child 
of  the  school  population.  We  saw  a  moment  ago  that 
the  amount  raised  per  child  of  school  population  in  1870 
was  $4.59;  the  amount  really  expended  per  pupil  enrolled 
in  that  year  was  $12.06.  (Fig.  24.)  The  amount  raised 
per  pupil  of  school  age  in  19 14  was  $12.26;  the  amount 


FIG.    24 
TOTAL  EXPENDITURE  PER,  PUPIL  ENROLLED 


P24.M 

16" 
12  •• 

6* 


-/ 

/ 

t2*fc 

^^ 

t 

Z084 


I870 


1880 


1890 


1900 


1910     1914 


really  spent  for  each  pupil  in  1914  was  $20.84.  That  is, 
between  1870  and  19 14  the  actual  expenditure  for  each 
pupil  in  school  attendance  increased  from  $12.06  to  $20.84 
— an  increase  of  73  per  cent.1 

So  far,  then,  taking  the  state  as  a  whole,  it  is  only  fair 

figure  24  shows  a  drop  between  1870  and  1890.  This  decrease  was 
due  to  the  relatively  small  increase  during  these  three  decades  in  the 
total  amount  raised  for  the  schools  (Fig.  17),  to  the  relatively  rapid 
increase,  during  the  same  period,  in  the  school  population  (Fig.  18),  and 
to  the  increase  in  the  proportion  of  the  school  population  taking  advan- 
tage of  the  opportunities  afforded  by  the  schools  (Fig.  23).  The  rapid 
increase  in  per-pupil  expenditure  since  1890,  the  amount  almost  doubling, 
is  due  more  especially  to  the  increased  funds  provided  for  the  support  of 
the  schools. 


i3 2        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

to  say  that  Maryland,  as  a  state,  has,  since  1870,  not  only 
provided  a  larger  total  sum  for  public  education,  but  that 
it  has  provided  a  larger  sum  per  pupil.  The  state  had 
thus  a  better  right  to  expect  good  schools  in  19 14  with 
a  per-pupil  expenditure  of  $20.84  than  in  1890  with  a 
per-pupil  cost  of  $9.08,  or  in  1870  with  a  per-pupil  cost 
of  $12.06.  Can  the  same  be  said  of  the  counties,  taken 
separately? 

The  wealth  of  Maryland  is  unequally  distributed. 
The  increase  in  school  funds  has  not,  therefore,  been 
entirely  uniform.     Between  1890  and  1900  (Fig.  25)  the 


fig.  25 
increase  in  per  pupil  expenditure  by  counties 


3 

E    < 
§>    v 

V      E     ZZ 

<  <  ffl 


S  *  8« 


73 

U 


o  _ 
t 


U  U  V 


^  -a  -a 


S    fe 


b 


E      ° 
E     £ 

o  ■?: 


!^2fc 


a  ft 


o 

"3 
H 


£    £    £ 


o 
J 


FINANCE  133 

increase  in  expenditure  per  pupil  enrolled  was  nowhere 
considerable;  in  Calvert,  Charles,  and  St.  Mary's  counties 
there  was  a  decline.  From  1900  to  1914,  however,  every 
county  in  the  state,  without  exception,  increased  its  per 
capita  expenditures,  some  of  them  very  largely.  The 
lowest  percentage  of  increase — that  of  Charles  County — 
was  about  50  per  cent.;  the  highest  Dorchester  County, 
160  per  cent.  Of  the  23  counties  of  the  state,  13  more 
than  doubled  their  per-pupil  outlay  between  1900  and 
1914,1  with  the  result  that  existing  disparities  were  still 
further  emphasized.  Thus,  in  1890,  with  per-pupil  ex- 
penditure varying  in  the  counties  from  $4.92  to  $11.97, 
there  was  less  disparity  in  respect  to  educational  ad- 
vantages than  in  19 14,  when  $9.17  was  spent  upon  each 
pupil  in  Charles  County  and  $28.81  upon  each  pupil  in 
Baltimore  County.  (Fig.  25.)  These  enormous  differ- 
ences are,  of  course,  pregnant  with  consequences  to  the 
individual  child. 

As  we  have  seen,  public  education  in  Maryland,  as  in 
other  states,  is  paid  for  by  both  state  and  county.  From 
1870  up  to  the  present  time  the  counties  of  Maryland  and 
the  city  of  Baltimore  have  raised  annually  about  70  per 
cent,  of  the  money  expended  for  education;  the  state  has 
contributed  about  30  per  cent.  (Fig.  26.)  While  the 
relative  proportion  of  all  school  expenditures  borne  by  the 
state  has  not  materially  changed,  the  total  amount  dis- 
tributed to  the  counties  has  risen  from  $458,000  in  1870  to 


'Allegany,  Baltimore,  Caroline,  Carroll,  Cecil,  Dorchester,  Frederick, 
Garrett,  Montgomery,  Queen  Anne,  Somerset,  Wicomico,  and  Worcester. 


i34        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

FIG.    26 
PROPORTION  OF  SCHOOL  EXPENDITURES  BORNE  BY  THE  STATE 


1UU'« 

50 
40 
JO 
20 

to 

-22^1* 

30.4?. 


1370 


1880 


1890 


1900 


1910      1914 


$1,675,000  in  1914,  representing  an  increase  both  in  the 
amount  provided  by  the  state  per  child  of  the  school  popu- 
lation and  per  pupil  of  the  school  enrolment.     (Fig.  27.) 

The  funds  distributed  by  the  state  are  derived  from 
several  sources.  Far  the  largest  factor  is  the  state  school 
tax,  which,  ranging  from  10  cents  on  each  $100  in  1870 
to  17  cents  in  191 5,  is  levied  against  all  the  taxable  prop- 


■s. 


FIG.   27 

AMOUNT  OF  PER-PUPIL  EXPENPITURE  CONTRIBUTED  BY  THE  STATE 


/ 

s                     

j*Q8- — -— 

/ 

'           r,'' 

YS5 

683 


^  4.02 


1870 


1880 


1890 


1900 


1910      1914 


•  PER  PUPIL  ENROLLED 

■  PER  CHILD  OF  SCHOOL  POPULATION  S-2& 


FINANCE  i3S 

erty  of  the  state  and  produced,  in  1914,  $1,654,000.  Out 
of  this  fund  are  paid  in  the  first  instance  the  expenses  of 
the  State  Department  of  Education,  the  maintenance  of 
the  three  State  Normal  Schools,  Teachers'  Retirement 
allowances,1  the  income  on  the  Surplus  Revenue  Fund, 
the  special  aid  to  high  schools  and  colored  industrial 
schools,  and  the  Free  Text-book  Fund.  After  meeting 
these  charges,  there  remained  in  1914  $1,305,000  which 
was  divided  between  the  counties  and  the  city  of  Balti- 
more on  the  basis  of  the  population  between  5  and  20 
years  of  age. 

Almost  every  state  in  the  Union  has  at  one  time  or 
another  apportioned  its  general  school  fund  on  the  basis 
of  school  population,  as  Maryland,  still  does.  But  the 
method  is  in  process  of  abandonment  throughout  the 
country,  and  for  obvious  reasons.  Education  is,  we  have 
said,  a  state  function.  The  state  supports  it  liberally 
because  the  state  desires  that  all  children  should  enjoy 
substantial  educational  advantages.  If  the  matter  were 
left  to  counties  and  districts,  the  disparities  in  educa- 

T^rovision  was  made,  in  1902,  for  a  straight-out  annual  pension  of 
$200  to  be  paid  all  teachers,  irrespective  of  financial  ability,  who,  having 
reached  the  age  of  sixty,  had  taught  in  the  schools  of  the  state  twenty-five 
years,  and  were  disqualified  for  further  service.  Within  three  years  it 
became  evident  that  the  financial  burden  involved  was  more  than  the 
state  could  afford.  The  law  was  accordingly  amended  to  provide  that 
pensions  should  be  paid  to  those  only  who  were  "without  other  means  of 
comfortable  support."  On  this  basis,  the  sum  required  increased  to 
$38,000  in  1914,  the  total  number  of  teachers  drawing  pensions  being  161. 
The  law  has  been  administered  with  great  care,  but  the  entire  question 
of  teachers'  pensions  needs  to  be  re-studied.  The  present  provision, 
while  relieving  certain  individuals,  cannot  be  regarded  as  a  final  solution. 
There  is  good  reason  to  believe  that  no  non-contributory  pension  system 
on  a  large  scale  is  either  wise  or  feasible. 


136        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

tional  opportunity  would  be  intolerable.  The  state's 
contribution  must  therefore  be  employed  to  equalize 
conditions.  Do  what  the  commonwealth  will,  this 
highly  desirable  object  cannot  be  fully  attained;  that  is, 
however,  only  the  stronger  reason  for  doing  the  best 
possible. 

Apportionment  on  the  basis  of  population  aggravates 
inequalities  instead  of  mitigating  them.  Certain  coun- 
ties are  able  to  provide  good  schools  quite  apart  from  state 
aid.  Unquestionably,  they  should  not  for  that  reason  be 
altogether  passed  over;  but  they  cannot  fairly  complain 
if  the  adoption  of  a  more  intelligent  basis  of  distribution 
somewhat  reduces  their  share.  Again,  the  rural  counties 
being  more  thinly  settled,  a  single  teacher  instructs 
fewer  children  in  the  country  than  in  the  city.  The 
cost  of  instruction  is  therefore  higher  in  the  rural  districts; 
apportionment  on  the  basis  of  school  population  alone  is 
therefore  unfair  to  those  sections  that  are  most  in  need  of 
help.  Finally,  the  Federal  Census  on  the  basis  of  which 
the  apportionment  is  made  is  actually  correct  only  for  the 
year  in  which  it  is  taken;  a  considerable  error  may  occur 
during  all  the  other  years  of  the  decade.  For  example, 
according  to  the  Federal  Census,  Baltimore  County 
had,  in  1910,  39,306  children  between  the  ages  of  5  and 
20;  the  distribution  of  the  state  school  tax  was,  however, 
made  in  1910  on  the  basis  of  her  having  26,290  children, 
meaning  a  loss  to  the  county  in  a  single  year  of  approxi- 
mately $24,000.  Contrariwise,  while  the  census  of  1910 
gave  Queen  Anne  5,924  children  between  5  and  20,  the 


o 

o 
o 


a 
a 


u 

a. 


a 


o 
o 


O 
U 


FINANCE  137 

county  was  credited  in  the  division  of  the  state  school  tax 
in  that  year  with  6,042  children,  thereby  receiving  from 
the  state  $3,500  more  than  the  actual  number  of  children 
at  the  time  entitled  her  to.  Such  inequalities  in  the  dis- 
tribution of  the  state  school  tax  are  unavoidable  so  long 
as  the  Federal  Census  is  relied  upon  to  provide  the  basis 
of  distribution. 

The  counties  need  funds  mainly  to  pay  the  salaries 
of  the  teachers;  a  "fair"  distribution  would  there- 
fore tend  to  make  it  equally  feasible  for  all  counties 
to  employ  at  decent  salaries  the  number  of  teachers 
really  required.  That  is,  if  distribution  on  the  basis  of 
school  population  worked  equitably,  the  counties  would 
receive  approximately  equal  amounts  per  teacher.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  the  amounts  received  per  teacher  vary  from 
$277  in  Baltimore  City  to  $147  per  teacherin  Cecil  County. 
No  two  counties  receive  the  same  sum.  (Fig.  28.)  Dis- 
tribution on  the  basis  of  school  population  is  therefore 
distinctly  unfair.  A  more  equitable  basis  is  sorely 
needed. 

A  second  fund,  known  as  the  Common  Free  School 
Fund,  is  composed  of  three  items.  The  first  item  con- 
sisted of  an  investment  of  $278,000  derived  from  taxes 
upon  state  bank  stock,  collected  in  the  first  instance  in 
1 816,  and  yielding  in  19 14  an  income  of  $6,000.  The 
original  intention  was  to  distribute  annually  to  the  coun- 
ties in  equal  shares  the  entire  amount  of  taxes  collected. 
It,  however,  so  happened  that  for  years  certain  counties 
had  no  schools  upon  which  they  could  properly  spend 


138        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

their  money.  Their  unexpended  share  was  accordingly 
left  with  the  State  Treasurer  and  held  for  them  as  a 
permanent  investment.  The  amounts  now  so  held  vary 
from  $21,400  in  the  name  of  Frederick  County,  to  $4,300 
for  St.  Mary's.     Baltimore  City,  Allegany,  Charles,  Cal- 


FIG.    28 
AMOUNT  RECEIVED  EER.  TEACHER. . FROM  STATE    SCHOOL  TAX 


■a 
a 

c    < 


a 


i 
3^ 


.5   c  —  —    >- 

—     *"     cs     a     a 


«  u  u  u  o 


u 


o 

o 
Q 


C9 


■O     T3 

o     ra 


a) 
~ 

o 
O 

a> 
u 

C 


2    £ 


3     *J 


$    te  -S 


0 
I 


(9    .S 


O 


vert,  and  Garrett  counties  do  not  now  participate  in  this 
fund,  they  having  used  in  times  long  past  their  full  share 
in  the  current  support  of  their  schools.  Hence,  while 
the  other  counties  now  receive  from  this  fund  annually 
from  $150  to  $750,  nothing  at  all  is  received  by  these 
four  counties  and  the  city  of  Baltimore. 


FINANCE  139 

The  second  item  of  the  Common  Free  School  Fund 
consisted  of  $229,000,  having  as  its  origin  $169,000  re- 
turned by  the  United  States  Government  in  1858  to 
Maryland  as  interest  on  money  advanced  by  her  to  the 
National  Government  during  the  War  of  181 2.  The 
income,  amounting  to  $10,400  in  1914,  is  distributed 
annually  to  the  counties  on  the  basis  of  their  representa- 
tion in  the  General  Assembly.  From  the  educational 
standpoint,  this  basis  of  distribution  is  arbitrary.  For 
example,  Calvert  County  in  1914  had  three  representa- 
tives with  4,119  children  between  5  and  20,  whereas 
Queen  Anne,  with  the  same  number  of  representatives, 
had  5,924,  or  almost  a  third  more  children  to  provide  for. 
The  apportionment  of  school  funds  upon  the  basis  of  the 
number  of  representatives  in  the  General  Assembly  thus 
disregards  the  main  purpose  of  a  state  school  fund,  viz., 
the  equalization  of  school  advantages,  since  it  takes  no 
account  of  the  number  of  children  to  be  educated  or  of  the 
disparity  between  the  several  counties  in  respect  to  their 
financial  ability  to  support  schools. 

The  final  item  of  the  Common  Free  Fund  is  known  as 
the  Surplus  Revenue  Fund.  It  is  the  part  of  the  surplus 
revenue,  distributed  in  1837  by  the  United  States,  and  in 
Maryland  set  apart  for  the  benefit  of  the  schools.  Un- 
fortunately, as  in  so  many  other  states,  the  original 
amount  was  spent;  the  state,  however,  obligated  itself 
to  provide  an  annual  income  equal  to  5  per  cent,  interest. 
Until  1910  this  income  amounting  to  $34,069  was  de- 
rived from  indirect  taxes  and  paid  from  the  General 


i4o        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

Treasury;  since  then  it  has  been  deducted  from  the  money 
raised  from  the  state  school  tax,  and  for  this  reason,  the 
Surplus  Revenue  Fund  may  be  said  to  be  virtually  lost 
to  the  schools. 

A  somewhat  complicated  plan  was  devised  for  the  dis- 
tribution of  this  income.  In  the  first  place,  the  sum  of 
$2,000  was  set  aside  for  the  indigent  blind.  The  re- 
mainder was  then -divided  into  two  equal  parts,  one  part 
being  distributed  to  the  counties  and  Baltimore  City  on 
the  basis  of  white  population,  the  other  divided  equally 
among  the  counties  and  the  city  of  Baltimore.  Once 
more  sound  principles  are  ignored.  Of  the  two  methods 
of  distribution  employed,  the  former  is  unfair  to  counties 
with  a  large  colored  population,  the  latter  does  nothing 
to  equalize  educational  facilities. 

Next  in  importance  is  the  so-called  "Academic"  Fund, 
not,  as  its  name  would  appear  to  indicate,  a  productive 
investment,  but  merely  a  regular  annual  appropriation 
made  from  the  General  Treasury  for  the  encouragement 
of  secondary  education.  These  appropriations  began  in 
1798  when  donations  were  first  made  to  'quasi-private 
county  academies;  by  183 1  itjiad  become  the  fixed  policy 
of  the  state  to  appropriate  $1,200  a  year  to  each  county, 
irrespective  of  size  and  needs.  Where  county  academies 
independent  of  the  public  school  authorities  were  main- 
tained, the  appropriation  went  to  the  trustees  of  these 
academies;  if  there  were  more  than  one,  the  appropriation 
was  divided.  If  there  was  no  academy  "with  its  separate 
board  of  trustees,  the  appropriation  went  to  the  public 


FINANCE  141 

school  authorities.  In  1914  $26,150  was  distributed  by 
the  state  in  this  way. 

In  the  distribution  of  the  academic  fund  every  princi- 
ple of  sound  educational  finance  is  violated.  Originally 
— at  least  subsequently  to  1831 — the  counties  were  to 
share  alike,  itself  an  unsound  method  of  procedure. 
Somewhat  later  an  unequal  distribution  was  brought 
about;  but  the  inequalities  were  not  dictated  or  suggested 
by  sound  principle.  Wicomico,  for  example,  with  an 
enrolment  of  5,888,  received,  in  1914,  $2,400,  whereas 
Carroll,  with  an  enrolment  of  6,697,  secured  only  $200. 
But  such  inequalities  are,  after  all,  preferable  to  outright 
abuse  as  evidenced  in  the  following  examples: 

Washington  Academy,  located  in  Somerset  County, 
some  three  miles  from  Princess  Anne,  was  erected  by 
private  subscription  in  1777.  From  1798  until  the  pres- 
ent time  an  annual  dqnatibn  has  been  made  from  the 
"Academic  Fund"  to  the  trustees  of  this  school,  varying 
from  $600  to  $8op.  For  three-quarters  of  a  century 
Washington  Academy  was  the  centre  of  higher  education 
in  Somerset,  but  the  doors  of  the  building  were  closed 
about  1864  and  never  again  opened  for  educational  pur- 
poses. For  a  half  century  thereafter  bats  found  a  friendly 
shelter  in  the  attic  and  vagrants  in  its  lower  rooms. 
Still,  during  the  entire  half  century  of  its  non-existence, 
the  Trustees  of  Washington  Academy  received  the  annual 
appropriation  from  the  state,  the  accumulated  amount 
of  which,  or  as  much  of  it  as  was  recovered,  including 
the  interest,  amounted  by  1904  to  over  $12,000.     With 


i42        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

$12,000  in  hand  the  academy  trustees  erected  in  1904  in 
Princess  Anne,  upon  a  lot  purchased  with  state  funds 
in  1844,  a  modern  school  building.  The  building  was 
deeded  to  the  County  School  Board,  but  the  lot  is  held 
by  the  academy  trustees,  and  this  building  is  to-day  the 
public  school  of  Princess  Anne.  Thus  from  funds  do- 
nated by  the  state  for  the  encouragement  of  secondary 
education,  but  which  were  not  so  currently  used  and  hence 
should  have  been  cut  off,  a  public  school  building  is 
erected  and  presented  to  Princess  Anne.  Moreover,  by 
reason  of  the  fact  that  this  appropriation  is  still  made  to 
the  Trustees  of  Washington  Academy  and  applied  to  the 
maintenance  of  the  present  school,  the  state  is  making, 
through  indirection,  an  annual  present  of  $600  to  Princess 
Anne. 

An  even  more  flagrant  abuse  of  state  funds  is  to  be 
found  in  connection  with  Patapsco  Academy,  Shipley 
Station,  Anne  Arundel  County.  This  institution,  es- 
tablished in  1837,  had  dwindled  by  1908  to  the  pro- 
portions of  a  one-room  school.  Though  the  building  and 
the  grounds  occupied  for  more  than  twenty  years  were 
the  property  of  an  individual,  and  the  board  of  trustees 
had  disappeared  altogether,  this  insignificant  private 
school  continued  to  receive  $400  a  year  from  the  treasury 
of  the  state  of  Maryland.  In  1908  conditions  seemed 
favorable  to  the  abandonment  of  this  "Academy"  and 
to  erection  in  the  neighborhood  of  a  much-needed  public 
school  supported  and  controlled  by  the  County  Board  of 
Education.     Such  was  not  to  be.     A  bill  passed  the 


o 
o 

o 

c 


3 
O 


"3 


bfl 


M 

"3 

5 


FINANCE  143 

General  Assembly  confiding  the  future  of  the  "Academy" 
to  a  committee  named  in  the  law.  An  appropriation  of 
$1,200  was  provided  to  purchase  in  the  name  of  the  state 
the  ancient  home  of  the  Academy,  and  in  19 10  an  addi- 
tional $500  was  supplied  from  the  General  Treasury  for 
repairs  and  improvements.  Two  hundred  fifty  dollars 
for  each  of  the  years  19 10  and  191 1  were  added  to  provide 
"courses  of  lectures  on  agriculture  and  its  kindred  sub- 
jects and  for  hall  rent  and  other  expenses."  Thus  an 
academy  at  best  conducted  for  years  as  a  private  day 
school,  and  having  in  1914  a  total  enrolment  of  39  pupils 
with  none  above  the  fifth  grade,  was  rehabilitated  at 
state  expense  to  serve  as  a  private  school. 

Other  instances  of  abuse  may  be  readily  cited.  Eight 
hundred  dollars  are  annually  paid  by  the  state  of  Mary- 
land to  Frederick  County  College,  which  is  no  longer  in 
existence,  the  buildings  being  rented  to  Hood  College. 
At  Cumberland  and  at  Rockville  similar  appropriations 
are  used  to  bolster  up  obsolete  institutions,  in  immediate 
proximity  to  high  schools  of  the  first  rank  capable  of 
taking  better  care  of  all  the  academy  students  without 
additional  cost;  at  Vienna,  Bel  Air,  Millington,  etc., 
money  from  the  Academic  Fund  is  employed  to  bring 
about  private  control  of  public  high  schools.  It  is  unnec- 
essary to  go  further.  The  Academic  Fund  is  in  many 
instances  wasted  or  worse  than  wasted.  When  the 
school  finances  of  the  state  are  reorganized,  this  money 
can  be  put  to  far  more  productive  use. 

There  remain  to  be  considered  certain  special  appro- 


144        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

priations  made  by  the  General  Assembly  for  the  benefit 
of  local  schools.  Regardless  of  the  amount  of  money 
involved  in  these  special  appropriations,  the  principle — 
or  lack  of  principle — makes  them  highly  significant. 
Laws  carrying  special  appropriations  were  passed,  for 
example,  in  behalf  of  the  Anne  Arundel  County  Academy 
in  1900,  of  Greensboro,  Caroline  County,  in  1904,  of 
Federalsburg,  Caroline  County,  and  of  Aberdeen  in  Har- 
ford County  in  1906,  of  Patapsco  Academy,  Anne  Arun- 
del County,  in  1908. 

There  is  no  justification  for  the  bestowal  by  the  legis- 
lature of  school  favors.  State  educational  funds  should 
be  and  can  be  distributed  on  the  basis  of  principle; 
capricious  departures  from  the  rules,  whatever  they  be, 
tend  to  log-rolling  and  other  forms  of  demoralization. 

Garrett  County  is  a  case  in  point.  In  1902  a  special 
annual  appropriation  of  $4,000  was  deducted  from  the 
State  School  Fund  for  the  benefit  of  Garrett  County  on 
the  ground  that  the  resources  of  the  county  were  nor 
sufficient  to  enable  her  to  keep  her  schools  open  the 
minimum  term  of  seven  and  one-half  months  required 
by  law  at  that  time.  When  first  granted  the  appropria- 
tion was  endorsed  by  the  State  Board  of  Education;  but 
in  the  meantime  Garrett  has  grown  in  wealth,  so  that  it 
stands  to-day  the  fourteenth  county  of  the  state  in  the 
amount  of  wealth  back  of  each  child  of  the  school  popula- 
tion. At  least  eight  counties  are  its  inferiors  in  this  respect. 
Nevertheless,  the  county  continues  to  receive  this  special 
appropriation.     To  tell  the  truth,  the  county  has  been 


FINANCE  145 

injured  by  this  special  favor,  for  it  has  been  successively 
exempted  from  most  of  the  progressive  school  legislation 
of  recent  years:  the  compulsory  school  attendance  law, 
the  minimum  salary  law,  the  nine  months'  school  term, 
and  the  like. 

Garrett  County  is,  however,  not  the  only  recipient  of 
such  appropriations.  Five  thousand  dollars  were  appro- 
priated in  191 2  to  buy  land  for  the  Ridgley  Agricultural 
High  School  of  Caroline  County,  and  a  like  sum  was  con- 
tributed from  the  State  Treasury  toward  the  erection  of 
a  public  school  building  at  Federalsburg.  The  same 
General  Assembly  gave  Caroline,  Queen  Anne,  and  Tal- 
bot counties,  -together,  $4,000  to  be  used  in  building  what 
is  known  as  the  Tri-County  High  School.  Talbot  County 
again  in  1914  received  $7,500,  in  part  payment  of  the  cost 
of  erecting  a  school  building  at  Sudlersville. 

All  such  special  appropriations  must  be  strongly  con- 
demned. The  case  is  not  helped  by  the  pretext  that 
the  schools  were  to  do  special  work  in  agriculture,  for  the 
state,  as  is  well  known,  already  gives  a  bonus  for  the 
teaching  of  agriculture  in  high  schools;  the  schools  spe- 
cially favored  never  contemplated  more  than  is  being  done 
in  the  Boys'  High  School  at  Frederick,  the  Baden  Agri- 
cultural High  School  of  Prince  George  County,  and  the 
Sparks  Agricultural  High  School  of  Baltimore  County — 
schools  built  and  supported  entirely  at  county  expense. 
The  fact  is  that  the  counties  wanted  schools  which 
could  not  be  provided  at  local  expense  without  consid- 
erable   sacrifice.     Special    appropriations    had    already 


146        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

been  made  for  other  localities.  Why  not  for  these? 
Political  conditions  were  especially  favorable;  the  local 
political  leaders  were  enlisted  in  the  enterprise,  and  the 
result  is  a  matter  of  history. 

The  general  question  of  state  aid  to  local  schools  must 
be  surveyed  from  another  angle.  Let  us  assume  that 
"favors"  are  discontinued;  upon  what  terms  should  the 
state  government  render  its  assistance?  Two  general 
policies  are  in  common  use.  Under  the  one,  the  state 
insists  that  local  authorities,  before  they  receive  their 
full  apportionment,  comply  with  certain  state  require- 
ments with  respect  to  the  conduct  and  management  of 
the  schools.  Under  the  second,  the  state  makes  its 
contributions  without  imposing  any  particular  conditions. 
Maryland  occupies  a  middle  ground. 

The  bulk  of  the  funds  distributed  by  the  state  of 
Maryland  to  the  several  counties,  and  especially  of  those 
raised  by  direct  taxation,  is  intended  for  the  support  of 
the  elementary  schools.  To  receive  their  full  apportion- 
ment, local  authorities  are  required  to  keep  the  schools 
open  at  least  nine  months  during  the  calendar  year,  and  to 
pay  white  teachers  at  least  three  hundred  dollars  a  year.1 

Tt  follows  that  the  minimum  school  year  is  nine  months.  Nine  coun- 
ties have  a  school  year  of  ten  months:  Baltimore,  Calvert,  Caroline, 
Carroll,  Harford,  Howard,  Kent,  Queen  Anne's,  and  Talbot.  However, 
the  colored  schools  do  not  continue  so  long  nor  is  the  term  so  uniform. 
They  are  open  ten  months  in  Baltimore,  Harford,  and  Kent;  nine  months 
in  Allegany,  Carroll,  Cecil,  and  Washington;  seven  to  eight  months  in 
Calvert,  Charles,  Frederick,  Garrett,  Montgomery,  Prince  George,  and 
Queen  Anne;  six  to  seven  months  in  Caroline,  Howard,  Talbot,  and 
Worcester;  five  to  six  months  in  Dorchester,  St.  Mary's,  Somerset,  and 
Wicomico,  and  only  four  months  in  Anne  Arundel. 


FINANCE  147 

Besides,  the  money  provided  for  free  text-books  and  sup- 
plies must  be  employed  exclusively  for  these  purposes. 
There  are  no  other  limitations;  the  state  makes  no  stipu- 
lation as  to  the  kind  of  superintendent  that  shall  be  em- 
ployed, or  his  salary,  or  the  quality  and  the  amount  of 
supervision  that  shall  be  provided,  or  the  kind  of  school- 
houses  that  shall  be  built.  Nor  is  there  any  requirement 
imposed  upon  the  counties  with  respect  to  the  amount  of 
money  that  shall  be  raised  locally  to  secure  the  entire 
state  apportionment. 

The  state  follows  a  different  policy  in  allotting  funds 
to  the  high  schools.  Specific  conditions  must  be  met  if 
the  local  authorities  are  to  receive  the  full  aid  of  the 
state:  a  certain  number  of  children  must  be  in  attendance, 
a  given  number  of  teachers  must  be  employed,  specified 
salaries  paid,  and  courses  of  study  of  a  given  length 
and  character  offered.  Under  the  stimulus  of  these 
requirements  and  the  financial  assistance  conditioned 
on  complying  with  them,  the  high  schools  made  more 
progress  within  the  last  five  years  than  during  the 
two  preceding  decades.  Counties  must  also  meet  certain 
requirements  in  order  to  secure  the  special  assistance 
offered  by  the  state  in  support  of  colored  industrial 
schools. 

Maryland  is  therefore  not  passive  in  the  distribution 
of  funds  for  the  support  of  local  schools,  but  she  is  by  no 
means  as  active  as  some  other  states  or  as  she  herself 
might  well  be.  The  very  purpose  of  levying  and  dis- 
tributing a  school  tax  is  defeated  unless  its  expenditure 


148        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

is  wisely  and  efficiently  directed.  It  becomes  the  state, 
therefore,  to  insist  upon  two  points:  that  every  locality 
should  put  forth  proper  effort  in  its  own  behalf;  and 
that  all  school  funds  should  be  spent  under  effective 
supervision.  Maryland  has  not  done  this  in  the  past;  she 
is  not  doing  it  now.  Thousands  upon  thousands  of  dol- 
lars have  been  poured  into  some  of  the  poorer  counties 
without  yielding  a  fair  educational,  return.  This  waste 
will  continue  until  the  state  takes  full  advantage  of  the 
opportunity  afforded  by  the  state  subsidy  to  bring  about 
better  local  support  and  administration.  A  new  era  of 
progress  will  open,  especially  to  the  elementary  schools, 
when  the  state  lays  down  specific  requirements  with 
respect  to  the  amount  of  taxes  to  be  raised  locally,  the 
kind  of  schoolhouses  to  be  erected,  the  preparation  of 
the  teachers  to  be  employed,  and  the  qualifications  of  the 
superintendent  and  the  supervisors  to  be  engaged,  as 
pre-conditions  to  receiving  state  aid,  and  when,  further, 
the  state  so  organizes  the  State  Department  that  proper 
guarantees  can  be  exacted. 

In  various  ways  now  described  the  state  of  Maryland 
contributed  in  1914  $1,675,201  to  public  education; 
meanwhile  the  total  sum  spent  was  $5,102,448.  The 
difference — that  is,  $3,427,247 — was  raised  by  the  coun- 
ties and  the  city  of  Baltimore  by  taxes  levied  on  all  prop- 
erty. The  amount  thus  raised  has  everywhere  increased, 
in  some  counties  remarkably.  While  the  increase  in 
Talbot  County  between  1900  and  1914  was  only  6.7  per 
cent.,  there  was  an  increase  of  over  100  per  cent,  in  seven- 


FINANCE 


149 


teen  counties,  and  in  Somerset  the  rise  was  as  much  as 
470  per  cent.     (Fig.  29.) 

These  increases  mean  larger,  even  if  not  everywhere 
wholly  adequate,  expenditure  in  behalf  of  the  individual 
child.  (Fig.  30.)  Somerset  County  produced  in  1890 
31  cents  per  child,  of  the  school  population  (5-20)  in 
1914,  $3.57;  St.  Mary's  contributed  37  cents  in  1890  and 


FIG.   29 
PERCENT  OF  INCREASE   IN  THE  COUNTY   TAXE5  1900-1914 


c 
2 
< 

a 
a 
< 


2    - 
*3     > 


1) 

B 

a 

CO 

o 

4-* 

J 

o 

O) 

0) 

0 

cfl 

0 
l-i 

a 

'G 

0 

■o 

t 

r. 

CO 

0 

U 

u 

U 

U 

P 

U, 

0 

K 

ffi 

u 

E 
o 

s  I 


c 

c 

< 

c 


o 

£ 


£  £  £ 


U 

P3 


$1.87  in  1914;  while  the  amount  raised  locally  in  Balti- 
more County  rose  from  $3.24  to  $12.55  in  the  same  period. 
(Fig.  31.) 

The  sums  just  mentioned  as  raised  by  county  taxation 
form  a  widely  varying  part  of  the  total  expenditure  on 
each  child.     In  Charles  County,  for  example,  the  total 


ISO        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 


FIG.   30 


INCREASE  IN  AMOUNT  RAISED  FROM  COUNTY  TAXES  PER  CUILD(5-Zo) 
■  *12.55 


•o 
c 


£ 

u 

a 

u 

re 

> 
re 

0 

a 

'u 

J3 

u 

1- 

0 

CQ 

0 

0 

u 

u 

u 

p 

.a  -w  xi  73 


■3 

u 


0 

0 

id 

b 

u 

is 

c 

id 

re 

0 

0 

O 

ffi 

B 

M 

b 

E 
0 
bo 
*j 

c 

0 

3 

4) 

» 

c 

<J 

0 

u 

c 

u 

Oh 

C 

s 

< 
c 

0 
0 

5 

so 

re 

t/3 

+-» 

3 

E 

O 

£ 
"re 
H 

c 
0 

a 

g 

CO 

re 

0 
0 

1 

0 

U 

4-1 
03 

O 

u 

0 

O 

V 

i~ 

0 

I 
v> 

re 

pq 

FIG.   31 

AMOUNT  AVAILABLE  PER.CHIW ( '5-20 ) IN 1914.  PARI  CONTRIBUTED  BY 
THE  STATE  AND  BY   THE  COUNTY 


"20° 


15° 


10" 


•O 

c 


>» 

c 
re 
to 


<     I 


0 

t 

re 

U 


re 

U 


3    .* 


.a    +j    -a   -a 


re 
O 


ho 


O 
be 


0 


£  2 


SI 

c 
a 
< 

a 


a  55 


c 

o 


2    *-  .S 


o 

0 

i  1 


Si 

o 

I 

13 

03 


FINANCE 


151 


expenditure  per  child  of  the  school  population  (5-20)  in 
1914  was  $5.34;  of  this  the  state  contributed  $3.90;  the 
county  $1.44,  or  27  per  cent.  Calvert  spent  per  child 
$5.87,  but  only  $1.85  or  31  per  cent,  was  county  money. 
In  contrast,  there  was  available  in  Baltimore  County 
$16.45,  of  which  county  taxes  produced  $12. 55  or  76  per 
cent.     (Fig.  32.) 


FIG.   32 
PERCENT  OF  TOTAL  AMOUNT  AVAILABLE  PER.  CHUJ>(s-2o) RAISED  BY  THE  COUNTIES 


lflOl 


v 
■O 

c 

3 

c  < 

a  a; 

V      C 
<    < 


v  -5  o   _ 

>  _  I-    ■- 

—  -  u 

w  ~  w 


,«  0>  u 

o>  2;  1- 

—  — 

5  o  a 


T3    T5 

O     re 

o 


O   -r 


C 
5.  J 


re    re    re    u.c"    u,    ™   ,£   .a  ,"i   «^    u   ;i   ^ 


V 

1  I 

§  re 

en  h 


£  &  £ 


U 


o 

a 

pa 


These  differences  are  only  partly  due  to  the  unequal 
financial  resources  of  the  various  counties.  A  county's 
ability  to  support  schools  is  best  indicated  by  the  amount 
of  taxable  wealth  back  of  each  child.  So  viewed,  Balti- 
more County  has,  in  1914,  $3,840  back  of  each  child;  St. 
Mary's,  $710.     Baltimore  County  would  at  the  same 


152        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 


tax  rate  thus  raise  five  or  six  times  as  much  per  child  as 
St.  Mary's.     (Fig.  33.) 

Fully  as  important  is  the  relative  willingness  of  the 
several  counties  to  tax  themselves  for  education.  The 
county  school  tax  rate  is  an  excellent  index  of  educa- 
tional interest. 

FIG.    S3 

TAXABI-E  WEALTH  BACK  OF  EACH    CHILD  (5-ZO) 


"4-000 


3000 


2000 


10OO 


■O 

c 

3 

C    < 

a 

M    <u    ■-. 

1)     C    ^ 

sen 


CU 

z 
£ 


a  — 


3 


<<MOUUOUQb,0   K 


•o   -a 

03 

o 
K 


c 

o 


'J 
bO 


0 


W  2 


■•-1 

c 
c 

< 


r3 


M 

o     ," 


U) 

c 


o    3 

EC/1 
a) 
!  a 


£  £  £ 


i 

13 


Between  1890  and  1914  the  tax  rate  went  up  in  every 
county  in  the  state — that  is,  every  county  in  Maryland 
cared  more  about  education  in  1914  than  in  1890.  But 
just  as  the  counties  did  not  care  equally  in  1890,  so  they 
did  not  care  equally  in  19 14.  The  range  of  disparity  is 
just  as  great  now  as  it  was  twenty-five  years  ago.  (Fig. 
34.)  At  the  former  date  Somerset  was  at  the  bottom  of 
the  list  with  a  rate  of  7.4  cents,  Allegany  at  the  top  with 

28.1  cents.     In  1914  Charles  is  lowest,  with  a  rate  of 

17.2  cents,  and  Garrett  leads  with  a  rate  of  45.3  cents. 


FINANCE  153 

Whether  a  high  tax  rate  means  relative  liberality  and  a 
low  tax  rate  relative  niggardliness  is,  however,  another 


fig.  34 

county  school  tax  rate 


c   < 

is* 

~  ^  -  ~  -  - 

<  <  M  U  U  U 


u 

5    <u 


4) 

C     - 


a 

u 


•o   -a 

O        C3 

O 

a 


*J      e      ° 
c     o     c 

«  2  eu 


&•  *j 

ro       to  j_, 

s  s  § 

o  w 


1  .§ 


u 


o 
E 


matter.  The  counties  are  not,  strictly  speaking,  directly 
comparable  with  one  another,  because  no  uniform  prin- 
ciple of  assessing  valuation  prevails  throughout  the  state. 
Hence,  one  county  which  makes  a  high  assessment  and 
levies  a  moderate  school  tax  may  be  doing  more  liberally 
by  its  schools  than  another  which  makes  a  low  assess- 
ment and  levies  an  apparently  generous  school  tax.  We 
have  already  urged  that  the  state  should,  in  order  to 
equalize  opportunity,  do  most  for  those  counties  that  are 
least  able  to  help  themselves.  But  such  inability  cannot 
be  at  once  inferred  from  a  low  assessed  valuation.     Little 


154        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

can  be  done  to  bring  about  readjustment  until  assess- 
ments are  equalized  throughout  the  state.  Meanwhile, 
as  far  as  tax  rate  goes  and  ignoring  assessment,  eleven 
counties1  appear  to  be  making  even  greater  financial 
sacrifice  for  their  schools  than  Baltimore  County;  but  the 
very  counties  that  receive  from  the  state  the  largest  pro- 
portion of  money  spent  on  local  schools,  Calvert,  Charles, 
and  St.  Mary's,  are  the  counties  that  have  the  lowest 
school  tax. 

While  there  is,  therefore,  some  reason  for  encourage- 
ment in  the  increasing  local  support  of  the  schools,  the 
fact  cannot  be  ignored  that  the  three  counties  receiving 
from  the  state  from  60  to  70  per  cent,  of  all  the  money 
locally  available  for  educa  tion  are  the  very  counties  that 
are  doing  the  least  for  themselves;  nor  can  it  be  over- 
looked that  rich  counties  like  Carroll,  Howard,  and  Tal- 
bot are  apparently  content  to  rely  upon  the  state  for  40 
to  50  per  cent,  of  their  school  expenditures.  The  moral 
is  plain:  the  state  cannot  afford  to  dispense  its  school 
funds  without  requiring  a  minimum  school  levy  on  the 
part  of  the  several  counties.  Even  so,  the  situation 
will  continue  to  be  more  or  less  chaotic,  unless  and  until 
property  is  assessed  upon  an  equitable  and  uniform  basis. 
For  no  absolutely  fair  distribution  of  the  state  fund  can 
be  made  unless  the  minimum  rate  upon  which  the  state 
should  insist  is  levied  upon  an  assessed  valuation  that 
really  means  the  same  thing  in  every  county. 

^Allegany,  Caroline,  Cecil,  Dorchester,  Frederick,  Garrett,  Kent. 
Prince  George,  Queen  Anne,  Wicomico,  and  Worcester. 


X.    IMPROVEMENTS  IN  THE  STATE 
ORGANIZATION 

THE  defects  in  Maryland  education  to  which  we 
have  now  drawn  attention  arise  partly  from 
inferior  organization  due  to  poor  laws,  partly 
from  inferior  personnel,  as  a  result  of  low  educational 
ideals.  Let  us  admit  at  the  outset  that  unless  the  people 
of  Maryland  effectually  demand  that  their  educational 
officers  should  be  chosen  on  the  ground  of  fitness,  and 
that  political  influence  be  eliminated,  the  mere  rewriting 
of  the  statutes  will  not  work  any  miracles.  The  rewriting 
of  the  statutes  is,  however,  desirable,  because  statutes 
can  be  so  drawn  as  to  assist  the  people  of  the  state  in 
making  their  will  prevail.  On  this  assumption,  what 
alteration  should  be  made  in  the  statutes  dealing  with 
the  State  Department  of  Education? 

The  State  Board  must  be  reconstituted,  so  as  to  remove 
it  as  far  as  possible  from  politics  and  so  as  to  make  it 
independent  of  the  educational  agents  and  institutions 
with  which  it  may  find  itself  called  on  to  deal.  We  have 
already  called  attention  to  the  conditions  which  consti- 
tute the  political  menace.  At  least  two  of  the  six  ap- 
pointive members  of  the  Board  must  be  regarded  as 
representatives  of  the  party  defeated  in  the  last  general 

155 


156        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

election;  worse  still,  these  appointments  must  be  made 
"by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate." 
Again,  the  Governor  is  an  ex-officio  member  of  the  Board 
and  as  a  rule  its  presiding  officer.  To  remove  the  State 
Board  as  far  as  possible  from  politics,  its  members  should 
be  appointed  without  regard  to  parties  for  long  terms — 
say  seven  years — confirmation  by  the  Senate  should  be 
dispensed  with,  and  the  Governor  should  be  deprived  of 
membership. 

The  Board  should,  we  have  further  stipulated,  be  in- 
dependent of  its  own  agents  and  of  institutions  with 
which  it  deals.  For  this  reason,  the  State  Superintend- 
ent, while  privileged  to  attend  its  meetings  and  to  par- 
ticipate in  its  deliberations,  should  not  be  a  member  of 
the  State  Board  which  he  serves  as  secretary  and 
executive  officer.  Persons  connected  with  educational 
institutions  likely  to  be  at  any  time  affected  by  actions 
of  the  State  Board  should  be  ineligible  for  appointment. 
For  this  suggestion  there  is  also  the  additional  reason  that 
a  State  Board  of  Education  should  be  essentially  a  lay 
body,  whose  members  are  chosen  because  of  their  interest 
in  education  and  their  knowledge  of  the  temper  and 
aspirations  of  the  people.  A  body  so  constituted  will 
not,  of  course,  originate  educational  policies,  decide 
technical  educational  questions,  or  supervise  the  schools. 
Theirs,  as  we  have  pointed  out,  is  the  privilege  of  repre- 
senting the  people,  through  bringing  the  experience  of  the 
layman  and  the  layman's  point  of  view  to  bear  upon  the 
policies  proposed  by  their  professional  agents.     It  is, 


STATE  ORGANIZATION  157 

in  short,  the  function  of  a  State  Board  of  Education,  not 
to  administer  the  schools,  but  to  govern  under  the  law, 
to  legislate  within  its  powers,  and  to  pass  judgment  upon 
the  efficiency  of  its  paid  officers. 

The  functions  of  the  Board  thus  reorganized  should  be 
more  clearly  formulated.  The  school  laws  of  Maryland, 
like  those  of  all  states,  are  the  product  of  frequent  and 
fragmentary  legislation,  drawn  by  different  persons  at 
different  times.  They  are  therefore  lacking  in  consist- 
ency. A  power  allotted  to  the  Board  in  one  instance  is 
in  the  next  given  to  the  State  Superintendent;  and  vice 
versa.  Thus  inspection  and  supervision  duties  are  at 
times  assigned  to  the  Board,  while  legislative  responsi- 
bilities are  imposed  upon  the  State  Superintendent. 
For  example,  the  State  Board  is  authorized,  as  we  have 
said,  to  grant  life  certificates;  the  State  Superintendent 
to  grant  certificates  to  graduates  of  institutions  outside 
of  Maryland.  The  Board  is  empowered  to  approve  the 
qualifications  of  regular  high  school  teachers;  the  State 
Superintendent,  of  special  high  school  teachers.  The 
Board  is  required  to  pass  upon  the  establishment  of  col- 
ored industrial  schools,  while  the  State  Superintendent 
certifies  to  the  controller  the  right  of  particular  schools 
to  receive  state  aid  after  they  are  established. 

The  principle  on  which  powers  and  duties  should  be 
allotted  to  the  State  Board  and  to  the  State  Superin- 
tendent respectively  is  simple  enough.  Matters  relating 
to  government  and  legislation  belong  to  the  Board; 
everything  ha\ong  to  do  with  the  execution  of  the  will  of 


158        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

the  Board,  that  is,  with  inspection,  supervision,  and 
administration  belongs  to  the  State  Superintendent. 
To  illustrate:  a  lay  board  cannot  be  expected  to  know 
enough  about  the  technique  of  professional  preparation 
to  pass  upon  the  qualification  of  regular  high  school 
teachers.  It  is,  however,  entirely  within  the  Board's 
scope  to  determine,  with  the  assistance  of  the  State  Super- 
intendent, what  these  qualifications  should  be.  But  the 
responsibility  of  actually  applying  the  standards  set  up 
is  clearly  a  professional  task,  belonging  to  the  State 
Superintendent. 

A  thoroughgoing  revision  of  both  the  school  laws  and 
the  by-laws  in  strict  uniformity  with  this  principle  would 
localize  responsibility,  facilitate  the  work  of  the  State 
Superintendent,  and  free  the  Board  from  the  necessity  of 
taking  up  technical  details.  The  resulting  relation  would 
be  analogous  to  that  existing  between  a  board  of  directors 
and  the  manager  of  a  business  corporation.  Like  the 
board  of  directors,  the  State  Board  would  establish 
controlling  policies;  then,  like  the  business  manager,  the 
State  Superintendent  would  be  responsible  for  the  con- 
duct of  the  schools  in  conformity  with  these  policies. 

To  complete  the  needed  reorganization,  the  State 
Board  of  Education  should  appoint  its  own  executive 
officer.  A  public  service  body  cannot  be  fairly  held 
responsible  for  a  chief  officer  not  of  its  own  choosing. 
Besides,  the  appointment  of  the  State  Superintendent  by 
the  State  Board  of  Education  would  remove  the  state 
superintendency  one  step  farther  from  politics. 


STATE  ORGANIZATION  159 

Finally,  the  State  Board  of  Education  should  be  em- 
powered, within  the  limits  of  its  annual  appropriation,  to 
fix  the  salary  of  the  State  Superintendent  of  Schools  as 
well  as  all  the  subordinates  selected  on  his  recommenda- 
tion and  working  under  him.  The  Board  supervises  the 
expenditure  of  millions :  can  it  not  be  trusted  to  regulate 
the  pay  of  its  own  officers  and  clerks? 

In  certain  important  respects,  the  powers  of  the  Board 
need  to  be  increased,  in  order  that  the  purposes  of  exist- 
ing laws  may  be  carried  out.  For  example,  the  State 
Board  is  already  authorized  to  remove  county  super- 
intendents for  cause  and  to  institute  legal  proceedings  to 
that  end.  There  is  need  of  a  means  of  enforcement  which 
can  be  applied  more  quickly  and  with  less  public  agita- 
tion. Again,  certain  counties — Calvert,  for  example — • 
do  not  pay  salary  enough  to  secure  the  full-time  superin- 
tendent required  by  law;  others — Dorchester,  among 
them — employed  non-certificated  persons  to  teach,  in 
defiance  of  law;  Anne  Arundel  engages  teachers  who  have 
not  had  the  six  weeks'  professional  training  required  by 
the  law  of  19 14.  All  these  statutes  are  violated  with 
impunity.  They  are  in  fact  hardly  more  than  counsels 
tendered  by  the  state  to  the  local  authorities  to  be  heeded 
or  not,  as  the  local  authorities  see  fit.  Meanwhile,  the 
state  pours  its  liberal  contribution  into  the  county  treas- 
ury, regardless  of  whether  the  law  is  enforced  or  broken. 
Unquestionably,  the  State  Board  should  be  authorized  in 
such  cases  to  withhold  the  state  appropriation  until  the 
laws  are  complied  with. 


160       PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

We  have  repeatedly  noted  the  absence  of  a  uniform 
method  of  certificating  teachers.  There  are,  indeed,  more 
standards  than  there  are  counties,  since  the  State  Board, 
the  State  Superintendent,  and  the  county  superintendents 
all  participate.  The  State  Board  should  be  invested  with 
full  powers  over  the  examination  and  certification  of 
teachers,  including  county  superintendents,  supervisors, 
principals,  and  attendance  officers.  Conditions  favor 
this  uniform  standard,  for  under  the  law,  the  same  sala- 
ries are  paid  in  most  counties.  Under  this  arrangement 
the  examinations  of  elementary  teachers  would  be  held  as 
now  at  stated  intervals  at  the  county  seats  of  the  respec- 
tive counties.  The  questions  would  be  prepared  and  the 
answers  read  by  the  State  Superintendent  and  his  assist- 
ants, while  the  county  superintendents  would  merely 
conduct  the  examinations  and  certify  to  the  character  of 
the  applicants.  The  great  mass  of  teachers  would  there- 
fore be  in  no  way  inconvenienced  by  the  centralization 
of  authority. 

A  final  suggestion  deals  with  school  buildings.  Mary- 
land possesses  a  few  school  buildings  as  good  as  any  to 
be  found  in  the  entire  country.  But  whether  a  new 
building  is  well  planned  or  not  is  now  a  matter  of  accident. 
The  results  have  been  pointed  out  in  preceding  chapters. 
To  introduce  system,  where  chance  now  rules,  the  State 
Board  should  receive  the  authority  to  prescribe  regula- 
tions governing  the  building  of  schoolhouses  and  the 
State  Superintendent,  as  its  executive  officer,  should  be 
required,  after  examining  plans  and  specifications,  to 


-a 
a 

J2 


STATE  ORGANIZATION  161 

give  written  approval  before  building  contracts  become 
valid. 

In  this,  as  in  other  respects,  the  State  Board  must  act 
through  its  executive  officer,  the  State  Superintendent. 
But  the  resources  at  the  disposal  of  the  Superintendent, 
inadequate  at  present,  need  to  be  extended  as  well  as 
specialized,  if  the  office  is  to  be  made  efficient.     With 
his  single  assistant,  the  State  Superintendent  cannot  now 
inspect  and  direct  the  high  schools  as  the  law  expects; 
nor  can  he  advise  with  local  authorities  in  reference  to 
their  local  problems — the  school  levy,  new  buildings, 
school  statistics,  the  county  course  of  study,  the  colored 
industrial  schools,  or  the  condition  of  public  sentiment. 
At  the  very  least,  the  Superintendent's  staff  must  be 
increased  to  include  an  assistant  superintendent,  to  be 
in  charge  of  the  correspondence,  publications,  records, 
reports,  educational  statistics,  and  the  audit  of  the  ac- 
counts of  the  county  school  boards;  a  supervisor  of  high 
schools,  charged  with  the  supervision  of  state-aided  high 
schools  and  the  work  of  all  other  schools  above    the 
seventh  grade;  a  supervisor  of  rural  schools,  who  shall 
give  his  entire  energies  to  helping  teachers,  superintend- 
ents, and  interested  communities  work  out  a  program  of 
rural  education  adapted  to  the  individual  and  collective 
needs  of  a  state  that  is  overwhelmingly  rural  in  its  popu- 
lation, industries,  and  interests;  and  a  white  supervisor 
of  colored  schools.     The  Superintendent  should  have  a 
reasonable  allowance  for  travelling  and  for  clerical  aid. 
The  total  annual  cost  of  the  office  of  the  State  Superin- 


i62        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

tendent  will  be  thus  increased  from  $7,700  to  perhaps 
$20,000  a  year.  The  increase  is  large,  not  because  the 
proposed  program  is  elaborate,  but  because  the  former 
basis  was  utterly  inadequate.  The  expense  of  conducting 
the  state  department  must  be  regarded  as  an  overhead 
charge  incurred  for  the  purpose  of  getting  better  results 
from  the  state's  present  school  expenditure.  Is  it  not 
economy  to  spend  $20,000  in  order  that  $1,500,000  raised 
by  the  state  may  be  wisely  rather  than  inefficiently  used 
and  that  $3,500,000  raised  locally  may  be  more  effec- 
tively expended?  Moreover,  the  increased  cost  of  the 
state  department  does  not  mean  increased  taxation  or 
increased  appropriations;  for  it  is  paid  for,  not  by  the 
state  treasury,  but  by  the  school  fund,  and  it  is  wisdom 
to  make  sure  of  an  effective  central  administration  if  the 
counties  do  get  a  few  hundred  dollars  less  apiece.  Even 
so,  there  need  be  no  fear  that  the  state  department  will 
be  unduly  strong.  The  counties  retain  their  proper 
power  and  authority;  the  state  department  is  simply 
enabled  to  cooperate  with  them  intelligently,  and  the 
state  fund  is,  as  it  should  be,  the  lever,  by  means  of  which 
the  counties  can  be  brought  into  line. 


XI.     IMPROVEMENTS  IN  THE  COUNTY 
ORGANIZATION 

A  STRENGTHENED  State  Department  of  Educa- 
tion must,  as  we  have  just  said,  be  accompanied 
by  a  strengthened  county  educational  organiza- 
tion. To  this  end  three  steps  must  be  taken:  the  county 
school  boards  must  be  placed  on  an  educational,  instead 
of  a  political,  basis ;  they  must  be  made  reasonably  inde- 
pendent on  the  financial  side ;  and  they  must  be  provided 
with  an  adequate  professional  staff. 

The  county  boards  should  represent  local  interest 
in  education.  Can  such  boards  be  constituted  without 
regard  to  political  considerations  if  appointments  con- 
tinue to  be  made  by  the  Governor?  Certainly,  politics 
will  creep  in,  unless  public  sentiment  is  vigilant,  intelli- 
gent, and  determined.  The  present  law  should  be  so 
modified  as  to  concentrate  responsibility  in  the  Governor, 
who  should  not  be  permitted  to  share  his  responsibility 
with  the  Senate.  The  Governor  will  thus  be  in  position 
to  make  his  educational  appointments  without  deferring 
to  political  influences.  Otherwise,  with  a  change  of  admin- 
istration, Democrats  will  succeed  Republicans,  and  vice 
versa,  irrespective  of  past  services  or  efficiency. 

County  school  boards  in  the  next  place  must  be  given 

i6j 


1 64        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

a  reasonable  degree  of  financial  freedom.  Financial 
independence  is  needed  not  only  to  complete  the  libera- 
tion of  the  boards  from  county  politics,  but  to  put  them 
in  position  to  do  their  duty  by  the  schools.  There  is  not 
a  county  in  the  state,  as  previously  pointed  out,  in  which 
the  schools  have  not  suffered  from  unjustifiable  lack  of 
funds.  So  acute  did  the  needs  in  five  counties  become — 
and  among  these  are  the  largest  and  financially  the 
strongest — Baltimore,  Allegany,  Frederick,  Montgomery, 
and  Prince  George,  that,  as  we  have  remarked,  recourse 
was  had  to  the  General  Assembly  for  legislation  compel- 
ling financial  action  on  the  part  of  the  county  commis- 
sioners. If  the  largest  and  richest  counties  cannot  wring 
from  the  county  commissioners  ample  funds  for  the 
schools,  boards  of  education  in  smaller  and  less  wealthy 
counties  must  surely  find  themselves  in  an  impossible 
position. 

It  was  never  intended,  if  we  read  the  law  aright,  that 
the  county  commissioners  should  really  control  school 
finances.  They  were  expected  simply  to  protect  the  tax- 
payer against  waste,  as  is  proved  by  the  fact  that  the 
commissioners  are  required  to  levy  the  taxes,  demanded 
by  the  County  Board  of  Education,  up  to  a  certain  limit. 
Beyond  this  limit,  the  county  commissioners  enjoy  dis- 
cretion obviously  meant  to  enable  them  to  check  extrava- 
gance, not  to  block  progress.  Unfortunately,  the 
present  mandatory  rate  that  must  be  levied  on  the  re- 
quest of  the  county  educational  authorities  is  entirely 
inadequate;  so  inadequate,  that  funds  are  insufficient 


COUNTY  ORGANIZATION  165 

even  when  additional  levies  from  1  to  28  cents  on  $100 
are  raised.  The  remedy  must  be  sought  in  the  first 
place  in  raising  the  mandatory  limit. 

Just  where  the  limit  should  be  placed  is  not  easy  to 
determine.  No  county  now  raises  more  money  than  it 
ought.  Hence  the  mandatory  limit  up  to  which  county 
commissioners  must  act  on  the  request  of  the  school 
boards  should  approximate  the  highest  rates  now  levied. 
Four  counties  now  levy  in  excess  of  40  cents  on  the  $100: 
Garrett,  45  cents;  Worcester,  44;  Queen  Anne  and  Alle- 
gany, 43.  In  view  of  the  needs  of  the  schools  even  in 
these  counties,  a  mandatory  maximum  rate  of  50  cents  on 
the  $100  for  the  state  would  not  be  excessive.  It  does 
not  follow  that  this  maximum  will  be  requested  unless 
it  is  needed  or  can  be  afforded.  School  boards  are  just 
as  amenable  to  local  considerations  as  other  bodies. 
They  are  not  likely  to  go  faster  than  local  sentiment  ap- 
proves or  local  resources  allow. 

Even  then,  a  levy  of  50  cents  on  $100  will  not  pay  for 
new  buildings:  no  feasible  current  levy  could  or  should. 
A  school  building  that  has  a  life  of  twenty-five  years  or 
more  should  be  paid  for  by  the  successive  generations 
who  use  it — that  is,  by  a  bond  issue.  At  present  a  bond 
issue  for  school  building  requires  legislative  action  and 
therefore  often  involves  log-rolling  and  politics.  The 
state  should  have  a  general  law  permitting  counties  to 
issue  bonds  for  the  erection  of  buildings  up  to  a  fixed 
per  cent,  of  the  assessable  property  of  the  county,  and 
also  empowering  them  to  hold  a  special  election  if  this 


166        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

amount  is  to  be  exceeded.  Five  per  cent,  is  the  usual 
maximum,  but  in  Louisiana  it  is  10  per  cent.,  and  in  Vir- 
ginia, 18  per  cent. 

If  the  suggestions  just  made  should  be  written  into  the 
law,  it  would  be  possible  for  the  counties  to  do  their  duty 
by  the  schools.  Even  then  the  counties  might,  of  course, 
be  recalcitrant.  The  remedy  is  easy.  Maryland  now 
distributes  an  unusually  large  sum  in  aid  of  education 
without  requiring  from  the  counties  an  adequate  "quid 
pro  quo."  In  consequence,  the  counties  that  receive 
most  do  least.  As  a  pre-condition  to  receiving  any  part 
of  the  state's  largess  at  all,  every  county  should  be  re- 
quired first  to  make  a  fixed  local  minimum  school  levy. 
This  minimum  local  levy  ought  not  to  be  lower  than  the 
present  average  local  levy  for  all  the  counties  taken  to- 
gether— viz.,  34  cents  on  the  $100.  Even  a  minimum 
local  levy  of  34  cents  would  materially  affect  only  eight 
counties.  These  are,  however,  the  very  counties  that 
should  be  affected — rich  counties  like  Carroll,  Howard, 
Talbot,  and  Washington,  because  they  are  relying  too 
much  on  the  state;  and  poor  counties  like  Anne  Arundel, 
Calvert,  Charles,  and  St.  Mary's,  because  they  are  doing 
too  little  for  themselves. 

Let  us  assume  that  in  the  ways  above  mentioned 
local  education  is  more  effectively  financed.  Does  it 
follow  that  more  money  will  make  better  schools? 
Not  necessarily.  The  present  organization  in  most 
counties  cannot  really  use  to  good  purpose  much  larger 
sums  than  are  now  spent.     If  the  supply  of  money  is 


COUNTY  ORGANIZATION  167 

to  be  increased,  steps  must  be  taken  to  ensure  its  wise 
expenditure. 

The  counties — we  need  hardly  repeat  that  there  are 
exceptions — need  more  competent  educational  leader- 
ship. No  one  should  be  eligible  to  a  county  superintend- 
ency  unless  he  possesses  definite  professional  qualifica- 
tions and  teaching  experience.  The  County  Superintend- 
ent should  be  a  college  graduate  who  has  had  at  least  five 
years  of  actual  experience  in  the  elementary  schools,  and 
not  less  than  one  year  of  professional  work  in  an  approved 
university  specializing  in  educational  administration  and 
supervision.  His  appointment  should  require  the  writ- 
ten approval  of  the  State  Superintendent.  His  tenure 
should  be  at  least  four  and  preferably  six  years;  he  should 
be  chosen  in  the  middle,  not  at  the  beginning,  of  the 
Governor's  term  of  office;  his  salary  should  not  be  per- 
mitted to  fall  below  a  given  minimum,  and  the  state 
should  pay  from  the  school  fund  one-half  of  any  salary 
up  to  a  certain  sum.  Progressive  counties,  like  Alle- 
gany and  Baltimore,  will  gladly  pay  more  than  the  max- 
imum in  which  the  state  would  share,  in  order  to  retain 
in  their  service  able  and  experienced  leaders. 

A  County  Superintendent  who  is  thus  qualified  should 
bear  full  responsibility  for  the  conduct  of  the  schools  in 
conformity  with  the  state  laws.  He  should  have  author- 
ity over  the  courses  of  study,  the  choice  of  text-books  and 
school  supplies,  the  grading  of  the  schools,  the  examina- 
tion and  promotion  of  pupils,  and  over  the  employment 
and  the  placing  of  teachers  in  the  schools.     Of  especial 


168        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

importance  in  Maryland  is  the  point  mentioned  last. 
Politics  and  personal  interest  will  not  be  eliminated  from 
the  schools  of  Maryland  while  County  School  Board 
members  continue  to  be  influential  in  the  appointment  of 
assistant  teachers,  and  district  trustees  select  the  princi- 
pal teacher  in  their  respective  schools.  Teachers  and 
principals  should  be  appointed  by  the  County  Board  on 
nomination  by  the  County  Superintendent.  The  power 
of  local  trustees  should  be  limited  to  riling  written 
charges  with  the  County  Board,  while  the  dismissal  in 
each  case  should  be  made  only  on  the  recommendation 
of  the  Superintendent  with  the  approval  of  the  Board. 
Local  pride  and  interest  must  indeed  be  cultivated;  but 
it  is  believed  that  both  are  best  conserved  by  whatever 
measures  make  for  school  efficiency. 

All  but  four  counties  in  Maryland  now  suffer  woefully 
from  lack  of  supervision,  though  county  school  boards 
possess  the  power  to  provide  the  needed  professional 
help,  having  been  authorized  in  1904,  under  limitations, 
to  employ  assistant  superintendents  and,  in  19 10,  to  en- 
gage a  supervisor.  Thus  far  five  counties  have  chosen 
assistant  superintendents,  three  of  whom  do  the  work  of 
clerks,  and  only  four  have  full-time  supervisors.  The 
employment  of  supervisors  should  cease  to  be  permissive. 
Every  county  employing  100  teachers  or  more  should 
be  required  to  have  at  least  one  supervisor,  and  counties 
should  be  permitted  to  have  as  many  more  as  may  be 
locally   thought  desirable.1     The    state  should  guard 

'Two  small  counties  each  having  less  than  100  teachers  should  be  al- 
lowed to  join  in  employing  a  supervisor. 


COUNTY  ORGANIZATION  169 

against  incompetent  supervision  by  prescribing  minimum 
qualifications — viz.,  graduation  from  a  standard  normal 
school,  three  years  of  experience  as  a  teacher  in  the 
elementary  schools,  and  at  least  one  year  of  special  prep- 
aration beyond  the  normal  in  a  reputable  university. 
A  salary  commensurate  with  the  importance  of  the 
service  should  be  fixed  by  the  state,  half  of  it  to  be 
paid  out  of  the  school  fund.  As  an  additional  safe- 
guard the  appointment  of  supervisors  should  be  invalid 
until  approved  in  writing  by  the  State  Superintendent. 

Into  schools  improved  as  the  schools  of  Maryland  would 
be  improved  by  such  steps  as  have  been  above  recom- 
mended, the  children  of  the  state  must  be  regularly  and 
continuously  brought.  School  enrolment  must  be  syn- 
onymous with  school  population;  school  attendance  must 
approximate  school  enrolment.  To  this  end  the  state 
requires  a  genuine — not  an  optional — compulsory  attend- 
ance law,  affecting  all  children  between  eight  and  fourteen 
years  of  age.  But  compulsory  education  does  not  en- 
force itself.  Hence  the  employment  of  at  least  one 
attendance  officer  whose  qualifications  are  certified  to 
and  whose  appointment  is  approved  by  the  State  Super- 
intendent should  be  made  mandatory  upon  the  counties. 
To  secure  properly  qualified  persons  for  this  important 
work,  the  state,  sharing  equally  in  the  payment  with  the 
counties,  should  guarantee  a  minimum  annual  salary. 

Finally,  in  order  that  competent  educational  officials 
may  do  the  work  awaiting  them,  decent  quarters  and  a 
fair  amount  of  office  help  are  necessary.    The  state  should 


170        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

therefore  require  county  boards  of  education  to  provide 
satisfactory  office  facilities,  to  employ  adequate  clerical 
assistance — never  less  than  one  stenographic  and  sta- 
tistical clerk — and  to  bear  the  expenses  necessary  to  the 
performance  of  official  duties.  In  case  of  failure,  the 
State  Board  of  Education  should  be  authorized  to  with- 
hold the  funds  of  the  state. 

The  suggestions  made  in  the  present  and  the  preceding 
chapters  are  not  counsels  of  perfection.  They  represent 
what,  if  it  will,  Maryland  can  easily  do  to  improve  its 
educational  organization  and  to  provide  this  improved 
organization  with  requisite  facilities.  Our  suggestions 
need  not  go  further.  We  need  add  nothing  to  what  we 
have  already  said  on  such  subjects  as  teacher  training, 
courses  of  study,  sanitation,  etc.  These  are,  to  be  sure, 
the  really  important  problems;  but  they  are  problems 
which  can  be  solved  only  by  the  educational  leaders  and 
the  teachers  of  the  state.  Given  qualified  leaders  work- 
ing under  the  fairly  favorable  conditions  which  our  sug- 
gestions aim  to  procure,  everything  else  that  the  schools 
of  Maryland  lack  will  come  in  its  proper  season. 


XII.     FINANCIAL  READJUSTMENTS 

THE  changes  proposed  in  the  State  Department 
of  Education  and  in  the  county  school  organiza- 
tion furnish  additional  reasons  for  adopting  a 
new  policy  in  the  use  and  distribution  of  state  school 
funds. 

Maryland  has,  as  was  pointed  out,  several  different 
school  funds,  real  or  "so-called."  These  funds  estab- 
lished at  widely  different  times,  and  under  radically 
different  conditions,  are  all  distributed  in  different  ways. 
To  derive  the  greatest  benefit  from  the  present  liberal 
support  Maryland  as  a  state  is  giving  to  public  education, 
some  of  these  " so-called"  school  funds  should  be  abol- 
ished and  the  others  combined  into  a  single  fund  to  be 
known  as  the  General  State  School  Fund. 

This  policy  involves  the  abolition  of  the  Academic 
Fund  and  the  Bank  Stock  Fund,  and  the  discontinuance 
of  special  appropriations.  In  the  case  of  special  appro- 
priations, why  should  the  entire  state  be  taxed  in  order 
that  a  single  academy  may  be  singled  out  for  a  special 
gift,  or  in  order  that  a  particular  town  may  be  presented 
with  a  school  building  on  exceptionally  favorable  terms? 
Again,  the  Academic  Fund  now  bolsters  up  decrepit 
academies  in  the  very  shadow  of  the  new  and  vigorous 

171 


1 72        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

state-aided  high  schools.  Its  abolition  will  save  $26,000, 
and  education  will  gain,  not  lose.  The  Bank  Stock  Fund, 
as  has  been  pointed  out,  is  held  by  the  state  in  the  name 
of  nineteen  counties.  The  entire  amount,  $278,000, 
should  be  paid  over  to  the  counties  to  be  used  in  their 
discretion — perhaps  for  buildings.  The  road  would 
thus  be  cleared  for  a  single  fund  to  be  distributed  on  a 
scientific  basis. 

Into  this  single  or  General  State  School  Fund  all  the 
remaining  items  should  be  brought — (a)  the  return  from 
the  War  Loan  of  1812,  now  amounting  to  $229,000,  the 
only  productive  school  fund  of  the  state,  and  (b)  the  Sur- 
plus Revenue  Fund,  the  principal  of  which  was  spent, 
the  state  obligating  itself,  however,  to  provide  forever  an 
annual  income  of  $34,069.  The  identity  and  the  conti- 
nuity of  the  War  Loan  of  181 2  and  of  the  Surplus  Revenue 
Fund1  should,  of  course,  be  preserved.  The  consolida- 
tion of  these  funds  would  simplify  the  work  of  account- 
ing, and  facilitate  an  equitable  distribution  of  the  state's 
contribution  to  the  counties. 

From  this  General  State  School  Fund  should  come,  in 
the  first  place,  such  sums  as  are  needed  for  the  reorgan- 
ized state  and  county  organizations  and  for  such  lines  of 
educational  activity  as  the  state  desires  to  develop.     The 


xThe  constitutional  requirements  could  probably  be  met  if  legal  provi- 
sion were  made  for  raising  the  income  on  the  Surplus  Revenue  Fund  as  a 
part  of  the  state  school  tax,  to  be  distributed  according  to  the  provisions 
controlling  the  distribution  of  the  General  State  School  Fund.  Were  this 
done,  the  Surplus  Revenue  Fund  could  be  dropped  from  the  current 
accounts. 


o 
o 

<U 


O 


C 


o 

O 

7^ 


(J 

p 

c 


c 
z 


c/: 


E 


p 


FINANCIAL  READJUSTMENTS  173 

preceding  chapters  have  dealt  so  fully  with  these  points 
that  further  discussion  is  needless.  To  only  one  point 
need  special  attention  be  called. 

Maryland  adopted  in  1896  the  policy  of  furnishing 
free  text-books;  since  which  date  it  has  apportioned  to 
the  counties  and  the  city  of  Baltimore  $150,000  annually, 
amounting  in  19 14  to  61  cents  per  child  enrolled. 

This  is  a  wise  policy,  though  somewhat  too  narrowly 
conceived.  The  materials  of  instruction  comprise  more 
than  text-books,  and  often  a  good  teacher  can  do  quite  as 
well  without  text-books  as  without  maps,  illustrative 
matter,  handwork  and  drawing  materials,  supplemen- 
tary readers,  reference  books,  and  the  like.  The  law 
indeed  provides  that,  after  text-books  have  been  pur- 
chased, any  surplus  remaining  may  be  expended  upon 
maps  of  Maryland  and  supplementary  readers;  in  most 
counties,  however,  there  is  and  can  be  no  surplus. 
The  sum  originally  provided  was  even  at  the  time  in- 
sufficient, and  since  then  the  enrolment  has  increased 
26,000,  of  whom  2,800  are  high  school  pupils.  In  the 
very  first  year  of  the  apportionment  the  counties  spent 
on  school  supplies  8  cents  per  child  and  Baltimore  City 
36  cents  in  excess  of  the  amount  received  from  the  state; 
and  in  19 14  the  average  per  child  for  the  counties  was  20 
cents  and  for  Baltimore  City  65  cents. 

This  excess  expenditure,  naturally  enough,  is  largely 
confined  to  a  few  of  the  prosperous  counties,  the  majority 
spending  no  more  than  is  received  from  the  state.  The 
average  County  Board  of  Education  could  scarcely  be  ex- 


i74        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

pected  to  spend  more.  As  a  consequence,  the  supply 
of  reference  books  and  supplementary  readers  is,  as  a 
rule,  woefully  inadequate,  and  books  a/e  often  dog-eared 
and  unsanitary.  In  a  number  of  counties  there  are  few 
if  any  maps  and  no  illustrative  material  at  all;  in  more 
than  half  the  counties  objectionable  slates  are  in  use;  in 
not  to  exceed  three  counties  are  handwork  and  drawing 
materials  freely  supplied. 

To  furnish  free  text-books,  including  supplementary 
readers,  reference  books,  school  supplies,  handwork,  and 
drawing  materials,  in  adequate  quantities,  the  present 
apportionment  of  $150,000  should  be  materially  in- 
creased.1 So  long  as  the  materials  of  instruction  supplied 
are  as  meagre  as  they  now  are  in  many  of  the  counties, 
to  expect  teachers  to  do  good  work  is  like  asking  them 
"to  make  bricks  without  straw." 

Deductions  from  the  state  school  fund  for  special  pur- 
poses have  been  made  before  now;  hence,  no  new  princi- 
ple is  established  by  the  foregoing  recommendations. 
Nor  will  they,  if  heeded,  seriously  reduce  the  amount 
available  for  distribution.  Indeed,  in  consequence  of 
the  recent  increase  of  the  school  tax  to  17  cents,  the  total 
next  year  would  probably  not  fall  much  below  the  sum  of 
$1,353,000,  the  amount  distributed  in  19 14.  In  any 
event,  the  sum,  whatever  it  is,  will  be  more  effective  in 
connection  with  an  improved  organization  than  would 
a  larger  sum,  without  it,  and  it  should  be  distributed,  in 

^he  average  per-pupil  cost  in  typical  cities  of  from  five  to  ten  thousand 
is,  for  elementary  pupils,  $2.12,  and  for  high  school  pupils,  $4.90. 


FINANCIAL  READJUSTMENTS  175 

view  of  the  special  aid  provided  for  high  schools,  so  as  to 
equalize  elementary  school  advantages. 

In  thus  distributing  the  general  school  fund,  three 
factors  ought  to  be  considered :  (a)  the  school  population 
between  six  and  fourteen  years  of  age,  (b)  school  attend- 
ance, (c)  the  comparative  wealth  of  the  counties.  For 
practical  purposes,  however,  only  the  first  two  factors 
can  at  this  moment  be  taken  into  consideration;  for  the 
counties  do  not  at  present  assess  property  uniformly,1 
and  until  they  do,  it  would  be  unjust  to  take  from  those 
that  estimate  their  wealth  justly  in  order  to  give  to  those 
that  make  an  unfairly  low  return  of  their  property.  On 
the  existing  basis  counties  with  a  high  rate  of  assessment 
would  indeed  be  twice  penalized:  they  would  pay  an  un- 
due part  of  the  state  tax  and  they  would  receive  a  re- 
duced amount  from  the  state.  Hence  the  adoption  of  a 
thoroughly  sound  and  equitable  method  of  distributing 
state  school  funds  will  need  to  be  delayed  until  such 
time  as  the  method  of  assessment  becomes  uniform. 
Meanwhile,  every  county  should  be  required  to  make  a 
minimum  levy,  and  no  part  of  the  state  apportionment 
should  be  paid  to  a  county  that  fails  to  comply  with 
this  requirement.  It  goes  without  saying  that  any  county 
is  free  to  raise  more  than  the  minimum  fixed  by  law. 

There  is  no  reason,  however,  why  the  precise  portion 
of  the  general  school  fund  due  the  several  counties  should 
not  immediately  be  determined  on  the  basis  of  the  actual 

xReport  of  Commission  for  the  Revision  of  the  Taxation  System 
PP-  I3-I5- 


176        PUBLIC  EDUCATION  IN  MARYLAND 

school  population  between  the  ages  of  six  and  fourteen, 
and  the  aggregate  school  attendance.  Children  between 
six  and  fourteen  represent  the  work  to  be  done  in  the 
elementary  schools;  the  aggregate  days  of  attendance 
represent  the  part  accomplished.  If  the  state's  aid  is 
based  on  the  school  population  between  six  and  fourteen 
the  state  assists  each  county  according  to  its  elementary 
school  burden;  if  it  is  modified  according  as  these  children 
come  to  school  or  not,  the  state  makes  of  its  aid — as  it 
should — a  powerful  lever  in  the  carrying  out  of  a  general 
policy.  The  adoption  of  this  suggestion  would  not 
materially  affect  the  amounts  now  received  by  the 
counties  and  the  city  of  Baltimore,  but  it  would  stimu- 
iate  effort  to  get  children  in  school  and  to  keep  them 
regular  in  attendance. 


THE  COUNTRY  LIFE  PRESS 
GARDEN  CITY,  N.  Y. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

Santa  Barbara  College  Library 
Santa  Barbara,  California 

Return  to  desk  from  which  borrowed. 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


I,D  21-10m-10,'51 
(806664)476 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


AA      000  253  955    9 


MHMMMPmBBIBBaiBa 


I     '  II   I 

.       .  ..  ■ 


mil 


Hnuiii! 


i 


111 


illlllillijlilil 


;,,.;;,,. 


liiliiiiElltliitr 


'"■':■:; 


&& 


